Section 


The  University  of  Chicago  Publications 
IN   Religious  Education 

EDITED  BY 

ERNEST  D.  BURTON  SHAILER  MATHEWS 

THEODORE  G.  SOARES 


HANDBOOKS  OF  ETHICS  AND  RELIGION 


HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 


THE  UNITEBSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 
CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 


THE  BAKER  &  TAYLOR  COMPANY 

DEW  lOBK 

THE  CAMBRIDGE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LOKDQN  AND  EDINBUBOB 

THE  MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA 

TOETO,  OSAKA,  KYOTO,  FOKUOKA,  SENDAl 

THE  MISSION  BOOK  COMPANY 

SHANGHAI 


HOW  THE  BIBLE 
GREW 

THE  STORY  AS  TOLD  BY  THE  BOOK 

AND  ITS  KEEPERS  X^^^'^  ^^^^^ 


By 


MAY  10l9ig 


FRANK  GRANT  LEWIS,  PH.D. 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHIC/.     O  PRESS 
CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 


Cgpyright  1919  By 
The  University  of  Chicago 


All  Rights  Reserved 


Published  April   igig 


Composed  and  Printed  By 

The  University  of  Chicago  Press 

Chicago,  Illinois,  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 

We  have  inherited  the  Bible  from  a  distant  past,  and 
many  of  us  have  had  little  opportunity  to  learn  how  the 
inheritance  came.  We  grew  up  with  the  Bible  frequently 
in  hand  and  felt  its  benefit  before  we  knew  it  to  be  an 
inheritance.  Because  it  has  helped  us  we  have  come  to 
love  it. 

As  the  Bible  has  been  an  aid,  and  frequently  a  com- 
fort, we  have  learned  to  revere  it.  The  larger  the 
amount  of  aid  received,  the  larger  has  become  the 
reverence.  This  reverence  has  often  been  increased, 
unconsciously  perhaps,  by  the  fact  that  we  knew  so 
little  concerning  the  history  of  the  book.  One  of  the 
natural  elements  pf  reverence  is  mystery,  and  we  have 
found,  from  our  very  first  questions  about  the  Bible, 
that  it  is  a  book  of  great  mystery,  mysterious  in  its 
contents,  mysterious  as  to  the  way  in  which  it  came  to 
our  parents  and  to  us. 

Along  with  our  use  of  the  Bible  we  have  received  the 
training  of  the  schools,  and  some  of  us  have  been  to 
college,  or  to  a  university.  As  a  part  of  this  training 
there  has  come  a  study  of  astronomy,  geology,  and  other 
sciences.  Somewhere  in  these  scientific  studies  it  has 
dawned  upon  us,  perhaps  even  startled  us,  that  our 
science  and  our  Bible  seem  not  to  agree.  We  recalled 
that  the  Bible  tells  of  a  day  when  the  sun  stood  still; 
the  astronomy  we  were  studying  had  no  place  for  such 
an  event.  The  Bible  appears  to  make  our  world  only 
some  6,000  years  old;    geology  indicates  that  the  real 


viu  PREFACE 

age  of  the  earth  is  hundreds  of  thousands,  or  even 
millions,  of  years.  Other  similar  questions  have  some- 
times given  trouble. 

Thus  a  time  has  come  when  one  does  not  know  how 
to  do  without  the  Bible,  for  it  is  the  foundation  of 
religious  life,  the  guidebook  for  Christian  living;  and  he 
does  not  know  what  to  do  with  the  Bible,  for  it  appears 
to  be  in  conflict  with  things  which  are  taken  for  granted 
in  the  ordinary  affairs  of  life  today. 

As  we  have  gone  farther  in  thought  on  the  questions 
which  arise,  we  have  become  aware  that  in  the  Old 
Testament  especially  there  are  customs,  such  as  ven- 
geance for  wrongdoing,  war,  polygamy,  which  are 
approved,  but  we  shrink  from  accepting  the  approval. 
We  have  preserved  a  reverence  for  the  Bible,  and  at  the 
same  time  there  is  the  beginning  of  distrust  concerning  it. 

The  difficulty  hes  in  the  fact  that  the  history  of  the 
Bible  is  not  known,  and  especially  that  the  Bible  itself 
has  not  been  given  a  proper  opportunity  to  tell  its  own 
story  of  how  it  came  into  existence,  of  how  it  came  to  be 
the  Bible.  There  has  been  too  much  effort  on  the  part 
of  teachers  to  talk  about  the  Bible  rather  than  to  let 
the  Bible  talk  for  itself;  there  has  been  far  too  much 
enterprise  in  preparing  theories  into  which  to  fit  the 
Bible,  and  far  too  little  endeavor  to  gather  the  facts  in 
the  Bible  which  show  its  growth,  and  then  let  the 
explanation  of  the  Bible  come  out  of  the  facts. 

There  is  ample  room  then,  even  at  this  late  day,  for 
a  history  of  the  Bible  which  permits  the  book  itself  and 
its  keepers  through  the  ages  to  tell  the  story  of  its  origin. 
Such  is  the  aim  of  this  volume.  For  the  writer  the  kind 
of  study  here  pursued  has  been  invaluable,  and  he  has 


PREFACE  ix 

found  it  so  for  others.  While  it  has  taken  away  a  certain 
kind  of  reverence,  which,  after  all,  was  merely  a  sort  of 
superstition,  it  has  given  the  Bible  a  worth  and  power 
which  it  could  not  possess  before.  In  exchange  for 
superficial  sacredness  there  has  been  given  knowledge, 
light,  and  strength. 

The  reader  will  observe  that  I  do  not  deal  with  the 
question  of  inspiration,  nor  with  that  of  Bible  authority. 
This  leaves  the  way  free  to  cherish  any  theory  of  inspira- 
tion which  appeals,  and  to  accept  any  kind  and  degree 
of  authority  that  seem  good,  after  the  data  of  Bible 
growth  have  been  duly  considered.  It  will  be  natural,  I 
think,  to  find  that  the  facts  of  the  scripture  message  and 
their  personal  worth  in  experience  are  more  valuable 
than  any  theory  of  inspiration.  Each  person  may  have 
his  own  theory,  or  no  theory,  and  freely  allow  the  same 
privilege  to  others.  The  question  of  authority  also  may 
become  an  inquiry  into  the  lessons  to  be  learned  from 
the  Bible  material  and  their  applicability  to  experience, 
and  the  outcome  may  be  nobility  of  life  rather  than 
divisive  arguments,  with  a  higher  type  of  authority  for 
the  Bible  than  it  has  yet  known. 

I  wish  to  record  my  obligation  to  Professor  J.  M. 

Powis  Smith,  of  the  University  of  Chicago,  who  read  the 

manuscript  and  gave  me  kind  and  valuable  suggestions 

concerning  my  discussion  of  the  Pentateuch  in  the  days 

of  Ezra,  the  Book  of  Jashar,  the  name  Jehovah,  the  Book 

of  Daniel,  and  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.     But  he  must  not 

be  held  responsible  of  course  for  the  language  of  even  the 

eight  or  ten  paragraphs  affected. 

Feank  Grant  Lewis 
Chester,  Pa. 
March  12,  1919 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.  The  Old  Testament  in  the  New  Testament   .     .  i 
II.  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Time  of  Jesus,  Son  of 

SlRACH II 

III.  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Time  of  Ezra  and 

Nehemiah 17 

IV.  Sources  of  the  Prophets 23 

V.  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Time  of  Jeremiah  and 

JOSIAH 37 

VI.  Sources  of  the  Law 46 

VII.  The  Growth  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets    .     .  66 

VIII.  The  Books  of  the  Writings 77 

IX.  The  Hebrew  Bible  Translated  into  Greek    .     .  103 

X.  The  Books  OF  THE  New  Testament        ....  118 

XL  The  Bible  Translated  into  Latin 138 

XII.  Other  Early  Versions "...  169 

XIII.  Modern  Versions 181 

XIV.  Chronology  of  the  Bible  Writings  and  Versions  206 
XV.  What  to  Read  Further 213 

Index 219 


CHAPTER  I 
THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

I  wish  to  learn  about  the  growth  of  a  flower.  In  the 
springtime,  when  the  new  rays  of  the  sun  have  warmed 
the  soil  and  the  fresh  showers  have  brought  new  vitality, 
I  plant  the  seed,  watch  for  it  to  germinate,  and  observe 
how  the  blade  of  green  increases  to  the  stalk,  the  branches 
in  due  time  appear,  the  buds  follow,  the  full  flower 
opens,  and  the  mature  seed  completes  the  cycle  of  life. 
If  I  am  a  scientist,  this  study  of  the  flower  development 
has  furnished  opportunity  to  discover  the  scientific 
meaning  of  all  that  the  growth  of  the  flower  reveals. 
If  I  am  a  naturalist,  and  especially  a  lover  of  flowers, 
day  by  day  the  beauty  and  glory  of  the  unfolding  life 
have  been  a  source  of  charm  and  deep  satisfaction. 

My  home  is  near  a  great  river,  where  its  gathered 
waters  spread  out  into  the  vast  ocean.  In  childhood  I 
simply  see  the  water,  or  am  impressed  with  its  expanse 
and  shrink  from  its  mysteries.  When  youth  arrives, 
I  begin  to  wonder  what  the  river  means,  whence  its 
waters  come,  and  what  there  is  in  the  stream  beyond  the 
part  I  have  seen.  As  I  become  more  thoughtful  and  ask 
from  my  parents  and  older  friends  about  the  upper 
waters  of  the  great  stream,  there  arises  a  curiosity  to 
visit  the  sources  of  the  river  and  see  how,  from  the 
smaller  streams  of  which  I  have  heard,  there  grows  the 
mighty  current  which  day  after  day  I  have  seen  move 
by  my  home  and  out  into  the  boundless  sea  beyond.     If 


2  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

this  wish  should  be  gratified,  and  I  should  travel  toward 
the  upper  waters,  I  should  notice  each  branch  as  it  enters 
the  main  stream,  should  perhaps  follow  some  of  these 
branches  to  their  beginnings  and  learn  how  each  in  turn 
is  itself  made  up  of  various  smaller  branches,  and,  if 
I  journeyed  far  enough,  should  finally  reach  the  source 
of  the  main  brook  far  up  the  mountain  side.  Even  then, 
however,  I  might  not  have  seen  every  source  of  the  great 
river,  for  some  of  those  sources  are  hidden  springs, 
sharing  their  living  fountains  with  those  more  readily 
seen  and  being  thus  as  truly  a  part  of  the  great  river  as 
those  which  my  eye  caught  at  once. 

The  growth  of  the  Bible  is  Hke  that  of  the  river  rather 
than  like  that  of  the  flower.  As  I  sow  the  seed  and 
watch  the  unfolding  of  the  flower  Hfe,  so  I  should  delight 
to  sow  again  the  seed  of  the  life  of  Scripture  and  observe 
how  the  many  branches  of  that  life  have  shaped  them- 
selves and  entered  into  the  book  as  a  whole.  That, 
however,  cannot  be  done.  The  Scripture  growth  is 
unique,  the  only  one  of  its  kind,  and  it  cannot  be 
repeated.  As  my  home  is  by  the  fulness  of  the  river,  so 
I  have  been  born  and  my  days  have  been  lived  by  the 
completed  Bible.  The  only  way  to  learn  the  sources  of 
the  sacred  volume  is  patiently  to  trace  my  .way  back 
along  the  literary  currents  out  of  which  it  arose,  until 
I  reach  the  upper  waters  of  the  early  life  of  the  people 
through  whom  the  writings  came.  And  even  then  I  am 
likely  to  have  overlooked  some  of  the  most  important 
of  the  hidden  fountains  from  which  sprang  the  biblical 
life  that  has  become  a  part  of  mine.  I  must  at  least  be 
ready  to  recognize  that  such  fountains  have  entered  into 
the  Bible,  whether  I  discover  them  or  not. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT       3 

In  the  New  Testament  we  are  beside  the  mighty 
currents  of  literary  life  which  combined  to  furnish  the 
Book  of  Books.  Among  these  currents  we  are  certain 
to  find  important  traces  of  the  earHer  streams  of 
literary  life,  and  these  may  very  well  suggest  how 
we  are  to  retrace  the  lines  of  growth  through  which 
the  Bible  has  arisen.  Let  us  turn  directly  to  the  New 
Testament. 

Even  if  we  begin  with  the  opening  of  the  gospel  in 
Matthew  we  shall  not  read  far  before  we  find  a  reference 
to  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  Among  such  references 
will  be  that  in  the  familiar  verse  which  we  call  the 
Golden  Rule,  Matt.  7:12,  "All  things  therefore  what- 
soever ye  would  that  men  should  do  unto  you,  even  so 
do  ye  also  unto  them:  for  this  is  the  law  and  the 
prophets." 

When  we  first  read  the  gospel  story  we  probably 
never  asked  what  Jesus  referred  to  when  he  spoke  of  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets.  Later,  when  that  question  did 
arise,  it  was  natural  for  us  to  think  of  the  Law  as  the 
first  five  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  to  assume  that 
the  Prophets  referred  to  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel, 
Daniel,  and  the  Twelve  that  we  had  learned  to  call  the 
Minor  Prophets.  Unless  someone  has  told  us  differently, 
or  we  ourselves  have  had  exceptional  opportunity  to 
revise  that  thought,  it  is  still  the  one  which  controls 
when  we  read  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  To  be  sure 
of  this,  one  has  only  to  ask  himself,  or  a  Sunday-school 
class,  or  a  body  of  students,  even  those  entering  a 
theological  seminary,  what  Jesus  referred  to  when  he 
spoke  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  for  the  reply  is 
almost  invariably  such  as  that  I  have  mentioned. 


4  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Now,  however,  when  the  correctness  of  such  answers 
is  questioned  we  are  ready  to  ask  about  the  reference 
again  and  learn  in  what  respects  it  is  wrong. 

Let  me  hasten  then  to  offer  reassurance,  in  part  at  least ; 
for  the  reply  is  correct  as  far  as  the  Law  is  concerned. 
Beyond  that  perhaps  the  question  will  be  best  answered 
if  we  approach  the  inquiry  along  a  path  of  comparison. 

If  I  should  say  to  you,  "All  things  therefore  what- 
soever ye  would  that  men  should  do  unto  you,  even  so 
do  ye  also  unto  them :  for  this  is  the  Old  Testament  and 
the  New  Testament,"  you  would  at  once  understand 
that  in  mentioning  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New 
Testament  I  was  referring  to  two  collections  of  sacred 
writings  which  together  we  call  the  Bible. 

So  it  was  in  the  days  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles.  So 
it  was,  in  fact,  for  all  Jews  and  for  any  others  who  knew 
the  Israelitish  writings  in  the  days  which  we  call 
apostolic.  So  it  is  indeed  at  the  present  time  for  those 
who  have  come  to  understand  the  language  of  Jesus  and 
Paul  and  others  as  it  is  before  us  in  the  New  Testament. 
The  Law  was  one  collection  of  Israelitish  writings;  the 
Prophets  was  another  collection. 

It  is  an  easy  matter  for  one  to  see  this  for  himself 
today.  He  has  only  to  look  into  a  copy  of  the  Hebrew 
Bible  and  find  the  evidence.  This  Hebrew  Bible,  if  one 
does  not  already  possess  it,  may  be  purchased  through 
the  local  bookseller,  or  may  be  found  in  a  well-ordered 
library  ready  for  reference  use,  or  will  be  among  the 
familiar  volumes  at  the  home  of  a  Jewish  friend.  And 
this  friend  will  be  more  than  pleased  to  open  the  book 
and  explain  the  order  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  as 
they  stand. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT       5 

For  any  who  are  not  acquainted  with  the  Hebrew 
language,  or  are  not  interested  in  receiving  the  informa- 
tion through  others,  or  live  in  a  community  where  none 
of  the  sons  of  Israel  happen  to  make  their  home,  or 
desire  to  have  the  material  easy  of  access  at  any  time  for 
themselves,  there  is  now  a  happy  solution  of  the  question 
for  only  slight  trouble  or  expense.  This  solution  is 
found  in  an  English  translation  of  the  Hebrew  scriptures, 
made  by  English-speaking  Israehtes  in  a  form  so  similar 
to  the  ordinary  English  Bible  that  the  reader  will  hardly 
be  aware  of  the  real  character  of  the  volume  in  his  hand 
until  he  has  begun  to  examine  its  contents.  This 
important  and  useful  volume  was  published  in  19 17,  at 
Philadelphia,  by  the  Jewish  Publication  Society,  with 
the  title.  The  Holy  Scriptures  According  to  the  Masoretic 
Text;  a  New  Translation. 

The  Masoretic  text  is  the  ordinary  standard  edition 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  In  the  new  translation  just 
mentioned  this  text  is  faithfully  reproduced  in  an  English 
dress,  the  Hebrew  divisions,  the  order  of  the  books,  the 
titles,  and  other  distinctively  Jewish  features  being 
preserved,  some  of  these  in  the  Hebrew  characters 
accompanied  with  English  equivalents  explaining  their 
meaning.  It  is  a  volume,  accordingly,  that  anyone 
interested  in  the  Old  Testament  may  well  have  for 
himself  and  thus  become  familiar  with  the  Bible  as  it 
was  arranged  in  the  early  days,  and  as  it  has  come  down 
through  the  centuries,  the  only  change  being  that  it  is 
carried  over  from  the  original  Hebrew  language  into 
familiar  and  pleasing  English. 

Acquaintance  with  this  English  translation  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  or  with  the  Hebrew  Bible  itself,  if  one 


6  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

cares  for  the  original  language  of  the  Old  Testament,  is 
both  interesting  and  valuable.  The  acquaintance 
reveals  that  the  full  title  of  the  Israelitish  scriptures  is 
significant,  carrying  us  beyond  the  Law  and  the  Prophets. 
One  does  well,  first,  to  note  merely  a  transliteration. 
This,  as  nearly  as  it  may  be  reproduced  in  English 
characters,  is  Tor  ah,  Nehiim  u-Kethuhim  (pronounced 
torah,  nevee-eem  oo-kethoo-veem) .  When  it  is  trans- 
lated into  English,  we  have  "Law,  Prophets,  and 
Writings."  We  do  well  to  remember,  however,  that  the 
term  "Law"  in  this  title  means  not  so  much  legislation, 
or  statute,  as  teaching,  or  instruction,  or  information. 

We  have  seen  above  that  each  of  the  first  two  terms 
of  this  title  refers  to  a  separate  and  distinct  collection  of 
writings,  as  does  also  the  third;  so  that  the  Bible  of 
Israel  is  composed  of  three  parts,  each  a  carefully  limited 
collection  of  sacred  books.  We  shall  be  aided,  therefore, 
if  we  notice  what  is  included  in  each  collection,  as  the 
names  of  the  several  books  in  each  of  the  three  divisions 
of  the  Hebrew  volume  inform  us. 

As  already  mentioned,  the  books  included  in  the  Law 
are  those  we  have  long  known  as  composing  the  Penta- 
teuch, and  their  names  are  familiar:  Genesis,  Exodus, 
Leviticus,  Numbers,  and  Deuteronomy. 

When,  however,  we  turn  farther  the  leaves  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible  or  the  English  translation  to  ascertain  the 
names  of  the  books  which  are  included  in  the  Prophets, 
the  list  is  quite  other  than  familiar,  for  the  names  which 
appear  are:  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings,  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  Twelve,  this  last  being  the 
brief  and  inclusive  title  for  the  twelve  Minor  Prophets 
regarded  as  a  single  book.     All  together,  therefore,  the 


OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        7 

Prophets  is  a  collection  of  eight  writings,  all  of  Samuel 
being  treated  as  a  single  book,  and  all  of  Kings  held  in 
like  form  ordinarily,  though  in  some  editions  of  the 
Hebrew  and  in  the  English  translation  mentioned  above 
these  two  books  are  divided  as  in  our  ordinary  Christian 
translations  of  the  Old  Testament. 

As  we  observe  the  Prophets  further  we  find  that  the 
eight  books  are  separated  into  two  subdivisions ;  Joshua, 
Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings  are  called  the  "earlier 
prophets,"  and  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the 
Twelve  are  grouped  together  as  the  ''later  prophets." 
Just  why  the  Twelve  were  brought  together  and  regarded 
as  a  single  book  is  not  evident.  Apparently  the  number 
twelve  had  come  to  signify  some  idea  of  completeness, 
so  that  the  twelve  smaller  prophetical  writings  together 
made  a  prophetical  whole.  Possibly  there  is  more 
significance  in  the  fact  that  these  twelve  briefer  writings 
together  furnished  the  material  for  a  manuscript  roll 
nearly  equivalent  to  one  of  the  longer  prophetical  books, 
such  as  Isaiah,  or  Jeremiah,  or  Ezekiel.  The  combining 
of  the  twelve  writings  under  one  name  may  have  been 
brought  about  to  some  extent  also  by  the  thought  that 
it  would  be  appropriate  to  have  in  the  second  division 
of  the  Prophets  a  fourth  book  corresponding  to  the 
fourth  book  of  the  first  division,  thus  making  the 
"later  prophets"  equal  in  number  to  the  "earlier 
prophets." 

The  titles  of  the  books  included  in  the  Writings  are 
equally  interesting,  for  we  read:  Psalms,  Proverbs, 
Job,  Song  of  Songs,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes, 
Esther,  Daniel,  Ezra-Nehemiah,  and  Chronicles,  alto- 
gether eleven  in  number. 


8  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Such  then  are  the  three  divisions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible, 
our  ordinary  Old  Testament,  and  the  names  of  the 
several  books  of  each  division  as  they  commonly  appear 
in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  I  say  "as  they  commonly 
appear,"  for,  while  there  are  always  three  divisions  of 
the  Scriptures,  and  the  total  number  of  books  within  each 
division  always  remains  the  same,  the  order  of  the  books 
within  the  second  part  of  the  second  division  sometimes 
varies,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  books  within  the  third 
division.  In  the  second  part  of  the  second  division,  for 
example,  Isaiah  does  not  always  have  the  first  place;  in 
the  third  division  Psalms  sometimes  yields  the  position 
of  honor,  and  other  variations  occur.  The  lists  as  I  have 
given  them,  however,  are  the  ordinary  ones  and  are 
convenient  to  remember,  if  one  desires  to  have  the  order 
of  the  books  at  immediate  call,  as  we  frequently  memorize 
the  names  of  the  books  in  the  English  Bible.  For  our 
purpose  in  this  study,  however,  it  is  most  important  to 
keep  in  mind  that  there  are  three  divisions  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible,  and  particularly  to  remember  that  the  Prophets, 
as  referred  to  by  Jesus  and  Paul,  are  the  eight  books  in 
the  preceding  list  beginning  with  Joshua. 

We  are  now  ready  to  take  another  important  step. 
We  shall  take  it  most  easily  if  we  recall  how  often  in 
reading  the  New  Testament  we  find  a  reference  to  the 
Law  alone,  for  example,  Matt.  5:18,  ''One  jot  or  one 
tittle  shall  in  no  wise  pass  away  from  the  law";  Luke 
2:23,  "As  it  is  written  in  the  law  of  the  Lord";  Rom. 
2 :23,  " Thou  who  gloriest  in  the  law."  With  this  put  the 
easily  observed  fact  that  the  phrase  "the  Law  and  the 
Prophets"  is  much  less  common,  occurring  altogether 
only  some  fifteen  times   (Matt.   5:17;    7:12;    11:13; 


OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT       9 

22:40;  Luke  16:16,  29,  31;  24:27,  44;  John  1:45; 
Acts  13:15;  24:14;  26:22;  28:23;  Rom.  3:21),  the 
Prophets  alone  being  mentioned  about  as  often  (Matt. 
26:56;  Luke  18:31;  24:25;  John  6:45;  Acts3:i8,  21, 
24;  7:48;  10:43;  13:27,40;  15:15;  26:27;  Heb.  1:1). 

The  step  we  take  then  is  one  to  bring  us  where  we 
can  see,  from  the  above-mentioned  proportions  of  the 
different  classes  of  references,  that  the  Law  was,  for  the 
New  Testament  writers,  the  most  important  portion 
of  the  Jewish  Scriptures.  The  same  fact  may  be  seen 
in  another  way.  In  the  New  Testament  as  a  whole 
there  are  somewhat  more  than  one  thousand  references 
to  the  Old  Testament  books.  Of  these,  nearly  three 
hundred  are  to  the  Law  and  less  than  five  hundred  to  all 
the  Prophets,  with  about  two  hundred  to  the  Psalms, 
nearly  seventy  to  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  only  scattering 
allusions  to  all  the  other  books,  namely,  the  nine  of  the 
Writings  besides  Psalms  and  Daniel. 

In  short,  the  Bible  of  the  New  Testament  times  was 
practically  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  the  Psalms,  and  the 
Book  of  Daniel.  This  needs  to  be  modified  perhaps  by 
saying  that  the  Psalms  was  rather  a  hymn  book  of  the 
early  Christians,  quoted  much  as  a  preacher  of  today  uses 
our  hymns,  though  often  with  somewhat  greater  author- 
ity than  that  with  which  our  hymns  are  employed. 
Perhaps  the  most  striking  fact  in  the  proportion  of 
references  used  is  the  large  number  of  times  Daniel  is 
quoted.  That  disproportion  takes  a  new  meaning, 
however,  as  soon  as  we  become  aware  that  more  than 
two-thirds  of  the  nearly  seventy  quotations  from  Daniel 
are  made  in  the  single  Book  of  Revelation,  which  raises 
interesting  questions. 


lo  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Reserving  those  questions,  however,  for  a  later  page, 
and  holding  ourselves  now  close  to  the  great  current  of 
sacred  literary  thought  called  the  Law  and  the  Prophets, 
let  us  discover  where  it  leads  and  the  opening  of  sources 
which  it  brings. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  TIME  OF  JESUS, 
SON  OF  SIRACH 

(About  200  B.C.) 

We  turn  the  leaves  of  our  Bible  until  we  are  back  to 
that  portion  of  the  Old  Testament  called  the  Apocrypha, 
and  particularly  to  the  book  called  Ecclesiasticus,  or, 
by  the  longer  title,  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus,  the  Son  of 
Sirach.  Many  of  the  more  recently  printed  Bibles  omit 
the  Apocrypha  and  so  do  not  contain  this  very  valuable 
book,  but  it  may  be  found  in  almost  any  of  the  older 
editions,  or  may  be  secured  as  a  separate  volume  with  the 
title  The  Apocrypha  Tratislated  out  of  the  Greek  and  Latin 
Tongues,  and  published  by  the  University  Press  at 
Oxford. 

In  the  Prologue  to  this  Book  of  Ecclesiasticus,  which 
was  written  by  the  grandson  of  the  author  of  the  book 
itself,  we  read  the  following  important  and  suggestive 
language : 

Whereas  many  and  great  things  have  been  delivered  unto  us 
by  the  law  and  the  prophets,  and  by  the  others  that  have  followed 
in  their  steps  ....  my  grandfather  Jesus,  having  much  given 
himself  to  the  reading  of  the  law,  and  the  prophets,  and  the  other 
books  of  our  fathers,  and  having  gained  great  familiarity  therein, 
was  drawn  also  himself  to  write  somewhat  pertaining  to  instruction 

and  wisdom You  are  intreated  therefore  to  read  with 

favor  and  attention,  and  to  pardon  us,  if  in  any  parts  of  what  we 
have  labored  to  interpret,  we  may  seem  to  fail  in  some  of  the 
phrases.  For  things  originally  spoken  in  Hebrew  have  not  the 
same  force  in  them,  when  they  are  translated  into  another  tongue: 


12  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

and  not  only  these,  but  the  law  itself,  and  the  prophecies,  and  the 
rest  of  the  books,  have  no  small  difference,  when  they  are  spoken 
in  their  original  language.  For  having  come  into  Egypt  in  the 
eight  and  thirtieth  year  of  Euergetes  the  king,  and  having  con- 
tinued there  some  time,  I  found  a  copy  afiFording  no  small  instruc- 
tion. I  thought  it  therefore  most  necessary  for  me  to  apply  some 
diligence  and  travail  to  interpret  this  book :  applying  indeed  much 
watchfulness  and  skill  in  that  space  of  time  to  bring  the  book  to 
an  end,  and  set  it  forth  for  them  also,  who  in  the  land  of  their 
sojourning  are  desirous  to  learn,  fashioning  their  manners  before- 
hand, so  as  to  live  according  to  the  law. 

I  have  quoted  this  Prologue  nearly  entire,  in  order 
that  its  important  information  may  easily  be  considered. 
Two  or  three  things  furnished  by  the  Prologue  and 
bearing  on  the  history  of  the  Old  Testament  stand  out 
with  special  prominence.  We  want  to  give  them  atten- 
tion at  once. 

In  the  first  place,  we  observe  that  the  writer  refers 
three  different  times  to  the  sacred  writings  used  by  his 
grandfather,  and  that  in  each  of  the  three  references  the 
first  part  of  the  language  is  the  same,  or  essentially 
the  same;  in  each  instance  he  speaks  of  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets,  or,  varying  his  term  in  the  third  reference,  of 
the  Prophecies,  which  is  manifestly  equivalent  to  the 
Prophets.  To  this  extent  his  language  is  the  same  as 
that  of  the  New  Testament.  From  it  we  see  that  the 
two  collections  of  writings  which  were  the  main  portion 
of  the  Israelitish  Scriptures  in  the  days  of  Jesus  and  Paul 
were  likewise  definite  collections  some  two  centuries 
before  Jesus  and  Paul  were  born.  It  is  not  strange, 
therefore,  indeed  it  is  most  natural,  to  find  the  writers 
of  the  New  Testament  regularly  using  these  terms  in 
referring  to  their  Scriptures  and  using  them  with  perfect 


OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  TIME  OF  JESUS        13 

definiteness.  The  Law  and  the  Prophets  were  as 
definite  and  specific  to  Jews  of  the  apostolic  times  as 
the  Old  Testament  and  the  New  Testament  are  to  us. 

A  second  point  is  perhaps  even  more  interesting.  It 
is  the  fact  that  the  writer  of  this  Prologue,  in  each  of  the 
three  references  he  makes  to  the  Law  and  the  Prophets, 
adds  a  reference  to  some  other  writings  which  he  seems 
to  regard  in  the  same  manner  in  which  he  regarded  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets,  but  for  which  he  had  no  single 
name  or  title,  since  his  phrase  in  each  of  the  three 
instances  is  different.  He  first  speaks  of  these  writings, 
or  their  authors,  as  "the  others  that  have  followed  in 
their  steps,"  that  is,  in  the  steps  of  the  writers  of  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets.  In  his  second  reference  he  varies  the 
phrase  to  "the  other  books  of  our  fathers,"  that  is,  in 
addition  to  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  And  in  the  third 
case  he  merely  mentions  "the  rest  of  the  books."  He 
was  familiar  then  with  a  considerable  collection  of  sacred 
writings  for  which  he  had  no  single  title. 

This  reference  to  a  third  collection  of  sacred  books  is 
of  interest  because  the  completed  volume  of  Israelitish 
Scriptures,  as  we  have  already  noted,  has  a  title  showing 
three  divisions.  Law,  Prophets,  and  Writings,  the  title 
of  the  third  division  remaining,  even  to  the  present, 
without  any  such  specific  name  as  either  the  Law  or  the 
Prophets,  which  so  happily  designate  the  first  and  second 
divisions.  Whether  the  Writings  of  the  present  Hebrew 
Bible  are  the  same  books  as  those  referred  to  by  the 
writer  of  the  Prologue  to  Ecclesiasticus  perhaps  we  can- 
not say;  at  least  we  shall  do  better  not  to  undertake  to 
say  this  at  present.  That  some  of  the  books  are  the 
same,  however,  there  need  be  little  doubt. 


14  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

It  is  worth  while  noting  also  that  the  writer  of  the 
Prologue,  though  he  was  careful  to  mention  each  time 
each  of  the  three  collections  of  sacred  writings,  appears 
to  have  had  a  pecuHar  regard  for  the  Law.  This  is 
brought  out  at  the  close  of  the  Prologue,  where  he  says 
he  undertook  the  important  task  of  translating  the  work 
of  his  grandfather  in  order  that  his  readers  might  learn 
"to  live  according  to  the  law,"  leaving  the  impression, 
without  doubt,  that  the  Law  was  of  pre-eminent  import. 
The  same  idea  is  revealed  in  one  of  the  sentences  of  the 
Prologue  which  I  have  omitted  in  the  quotation.  This 
special  regard  for  the  Law  corresponds  to  the  distinction 
accorded  the  Law  in  the  New  Testament.  To  live 
according  to  the  Law  not  improbably  would  have  been 
assumed  to  include  living  according  to  the  Prophets  and 
the  other  writings. 

We  observe  also  that  the  writer  of  the  Prologue 
definitely  dates  the  time  when  he  went  to  Egypt  and 
began  to  give  attention  to  his  important  task;  it  was  in 
"the  eight  and  thirtieth  year  of  Euergetes  the  king," 
that  is,  Euergetes  II,  an  honorary  title  of  Ptolemy  IX, 
whose  thirty-eighth  year  was  about  132  B.C.  From  this 
it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  grandfather  of  the  writer  of  the 
Prologue  lived  about  two  hundred  years  before  the  birth 
of  Jesus,  and  that  some  two  centuries  before  the 
beginning  of  our  Christian  Era  the  Old  Testament, 
among  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  consisted  of  the  Law,  or 
our  Pentateuch,  the  Prophets,  and  at  least  several  other 
books  which  were  held  in  similar  esteem. 

Considering  what  we  have  gathered  up  to  the  present, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  Jews  in  Egypt  accepted  a  larger 
number  of  writings  as  sacred  than  did  their  brothers  in 


OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  TIME  OF  JESUS        15 

Palestine.  This  is  particularly  evident  when  we  remem- 
ber that  a  third  division  of  the  Old  Testament  was 
already  recognized  in  Egypt  some  two  centuries  before 
the  time  of  Jesus  and  Paul,  while  no  such  recognition 
appears  in  the  New  Testament;  the  nearest  approach  to 
it  is  in  Luke  24:44,  where  the  evangelist  quotes  Jesus  as 
speaking  of  the  things  which  were  written  "in  the  law  of 
Moses,  and  the  prophets,  and  the  Psalms."  Since  the 
Psalms  frequently  had  the  first  place  in  the  third  division 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  these  words  of  Jesus  may  be  a 
reference  to  the  entire  third  division,  the  Writings.  The 
reference  may  be  only  to  the  Book  of  Psalms,  however. 
Perhaps  this  is  more  likely  to  have  been  the  intention, 
since,  as  we  have  seen  in  chapter  i,  only  the  Psalms  and 
Daniel,  among  the  books  of  the  third  division,  received 
any  considerable  recognition  from  the  New  Testament 
writers. 

The  acceptance  of  a  larger  number  of  books  by  the 
Jews  in  Egypt  at  once  suggests  the  possibility  of  an 
attractive  inquiry.  For  the  present,  however,  it  may  be 
sufficient  to  remember  that  Egypt  had  come  more  under 
the  influence  of  liberal  Greek  thought  than  Palestine  had, 
and  that  the  Egyptian  Jews  naturally  responded  to  a 
wider  circle  of  sacred  writings.  Particularly  would  they 
find  satisfaction  in  books  written  by  their  Egyptian 
brothers,  while  their  brothers  in  Palestine  easily  depre- 
ciated any  writings  which  originated  beyond  the  borders 
of  the  ancient  home  of  the  nation. 

In  the  time  of  Jesus,  son  of  Sirach,  then,  some  two 
hundred  years  before  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  Era, 
the  Old  Testament,  among  the  Jews  in  Palestine,  con- 
sisted primarily,  if  not  altogether,  of  the  Law  and  the 


1 6  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Prophets,  while  in  Egypt  other  books,  apparently  several 
in  number,  were  attaining  a  dignity  akin  to  that  bestowed 
on  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  in  both  Palestine  and 
Egypt.  Having  thus  retraced  the  course  of  the  stream 
of  Israelitish  sacred  thought  back  through  the  book 
itself  to  about  200  B.C.,  our  next  step  will  be  to  follow 
farther  along  the  main  current  for  any  discoveries  it  will 
furnish. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  TIME  OF  EZRA 
AND  NEHEMIAH 

(About  450  B.C.) 

As  we  are  fortunate  in  possessing  the  Book  of 
Ecclesiasticus,  with  its  informing  Prologue,  so  we  are 
favored  by  the  Book  of  Nehemiah  for  the  period  some 
two  and  one-half  centuries  earlier,  when  Ezra  and  his 
colaborer  were  leaders  in  the  efforts  to  restore  the  sons 
of  Israel  to  the  home  of  their  fathers.  As  in  our  study- 
thus  far  we  have  gathered  information  from  the  Bible 
itself  to  show  what  the  sacred  collection  was  in  the 
periods  considered,  so  now  we  shall  be  best  aided  if  we 
pursue  the  same  method. 

The  important  passage  in  Nehemiah  begins  with  the 
eighth  chapter,  or,  as  paragraphed  in  the  Revised 
Version,  with  the  latter  part  of  verse  73  of  the  seventh 
chapter.  There  we  are  told  that  in  the  seventh  month 
of  the  Jewish  year,  that  is,  in  the  autumn,  the  people 
assembled  for  the  reading  of  the  Law.  The  reading  of 
the  first  day  was  only  a  beginning  of  the  presentation 
of  the  book  which  was  placed  before  the  people,  trans- 
lated from  the  Hebrew  into  the  Aramaic  language,  which 
had  become  their  form  of  speech  in  Babylon,  and  was 
explained  to  them  so  that  they  could  understand.  This 
makes  evident  that  the  Law  at  that  time  was  an  extensive 
writing. 

17 


1 8  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

On  the  second  day  the  reading  was  continued  (8: 13). 
Some  time  during  that  day  the  readers  came  to  the 
portion  of  the  Law  in  which  was  given  an  account  of  the 
feast  of  booths.  The  language  is  so  specific  that  we  can 
infer  from  it  with  certainty  where  in  our  Pentateuch 
they  were  reading.  It  was  in  what  we  call  the  twenty- 
third  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Leviticus.  We  may  see 
this  easily  from  the  following  parallel  arrangement  of 
the  two  passages.  In  the  first  we  have  the  language 
of  Leviticus;  in  the  second  is  given  the  account  of  the 
reading. 

Lev.  23:42  Neh.  8:14 

Ye  shall  dwell  in  booths  seven  And  they  found  written  in  the 

days;    all  that  are  home-born  in      law,  how  that  Jehovah  had  com- 
Israel  shall  dwell  in  booths;  manded     by     Moses,     that    the 

children  of  Israel  should  dwell  in 
booths  in  the  feast  of  the  seventh 
month; 

A  reading  of  the  context  of  both  quotations  will  reveal 
various  details  which  confirm  the  reference  of  Nehemiah 
to  Leviticus.  The  situation  is  one  to  stimulate  the 
historical  imagination.  As  we  read  the  language  we 
can  easily  picture  the  scene  and  portray  for  ourselves 
Ezra  and  his  associates  as  they  read  to  those  who 
gathered  about  them  to  learn  what  was  written  in  the 
Law. 

While  a  comparison  of  the  preceding  passages  presents 
one  of  the  most  striking  evidences  of  the  relation  between 
the  Law  and  the  use  of  it  which  was  made  by  Ezra  and 
those  with  him,  there  are  other  passages  which  indicate 
the  same  conclusion,  and  it  is  worth  while  to  carry  the 
comparison  farther.     Note,  for  example,  how  a  state- 


EZRA  AND  NEHEMIAH  AND  OLD  TESTAMENT     19 

ment  in  Deuteronomy  and  one  in  Numbers  were  obeyed, 
as  we  are  told  by  a  verse  in  Nehemiah: 

Deut.  31:10-11  Neh.  8:18 

At    the    end    of    every    seven  Also  day  by  day,  from  the  first 

years  ....  in  the  feast  of  taber-  day  unto  the  last  day,  he  read  in 

nacles  ....  thou  shalt  read  this  the  book  of  the  law  of  God.     And 

law  before  all  Israel  in  their  hear-  they  kept  the  feast  seven  days; 

ing.  and    on   the   eighth   day    was   a 

Num.  29:35  solemn  assembly,  according  unto 

On    the    eighth    day    we    shall  the  ordinance, 
have  a  solemn  assembly:   ye  shall 
do  no  servile  work; 

With  references  in  Nehemiah  to  the  passages  from 
Leviticus,  Numbers,  and  Deuteronomy  just  given,  it  is 
helpful  to  place  one  from  Genesis  dealing  with  the  life 
of  Abram,  as  these  quotations  will  show: 

Gen.  12:1  Neh.  9:7 

Now  Jehovah  said  unto  Abram,  Thou  art  Jehovah  the  God,  who 

get  thee  out  of  thy  country,  and      didst  choose  Abram,  and  brought- 
from  thy  kindred,  est  him  forth  out  of  Ur  of  the 

Chaldees, 

The  language  makes  clear  that  the  statement  in 
Nehemiah  grew  out  of  a  recollection  of  the  words  from 
Genesis. 

It  is  easy  also  to  find  a  similar  correspondence 
between  Exodus  and  Nehemiah,  as  appears  from  these 
two  quotations: 

ExoD.  13:21  Neh.  9:12 

And  Jehovah  went  before  them  Moreover  in  a  pillar  of  cloud 

by  day  in  a  pillar  of  cloud,  to  lead  thou  leddest  them  by  day;  and  in 

them  the  way,  and  by  night  in  a  a  pillar  of  fire  by  night,  to  give 

pillar  of  fire,  to  give  them  light;  them  light  on  the  way  wherein 

that  they  might  go  by  day  and  by  they  should  go. 
night. 


20  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

While  other  language  in  Nehemiah  referring  clearly 
to  the  language  of  the  first  five  books  of  our  Old  Testa- 
ment might  easily  be  given,  the  foregoing  quotations  are 
ample  to  illustrate  how  the  Law  of  the  days  of  Ezra 
assumes  much  at  least  of  the  Israelitish  writings  which 
we  call  the  Pentateuch.  The  impression  made  by  the 
parallels  will  be  emphasized  if  each  of  the  quotations  is 
read  with  its  context,  and  the  fuller  details  are  thus 
allowed  opportunity  to  furnish  their  natural  meaning  and 
suggestion. 

The  reading  of  this  Law  seems  to  have  required  much 
of  the  seven  days  of  the  solemn  gathering.  This  is  clear 
from  the  record  at  the  close  of  the  eighth  chapter;  and 
it  makes  certain  that  the  Law  as  read  was  an  extended 
book,  or  consisted  of  writings  which  together  amounted 
to  what  may  have  been  equivalent  to  our  Pentateuch. 

Already  in  reading  this  graphic  account  of  the 
presentation  of  the  Law  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  it  may 
have  been  noticed  that  there  is  no  mention  of  the 
Prophets.  Though  it  was  an  occasion  of  the  greatest 
religious  import  for  the  Israelites,  one  in  which  the 
majestic  messages  of  the  Prophets  would  have  been 
exceedingly  fitting,  there  is  not  a  word  in  the  narrative 
to  recall  the  second  division  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

This  does  not  mean  necessarily  that  the  writings 
which  Jesus  and  Paul  and  the  son  of  Sirach  appealed  to 
as  the  Prophets  were  not  in  existence  in  the  time  of  Ezra. 
It  suggests  only  that  the  Prophets  had  not  yet  come 
together  into  a  recognized  collection  of  sacred  writings 
to  be  used  as  Ezra  and  his  fellows  used  the  Law,  The 
Old  Testament,  when  the  sons  of  Israel  returned  from 
Babylonia  to  Palestine  and  solemnly  subscribed  to  its 


EZRA  AND  NEHEMIAH  AND  OLD  TESTAMENT     21 

regulations  as  read  and  explained  by  their  leaders,  was 
limited,  so  far  as  the  Nehemiah  account  advises,  to  the 
Law,  an  extensive  collection  of  regulations  and  precepts 
which  could  not  have  been  more  than  our  Pentateuch 
and  may  have  been  only  an  earlier  and  briefer  edition 
of  the  Law,  or  even  only  an  extensive  priestly  source 
of  it. 

One  other  point  at  least  in  this  narrative  of  Nehemiah 
ought  not  to  be  passed  over  without  consideration.  This 
is  the  fact  that  the  reading  of  the  Law  brought  to  the 
people  something  which  was  altogether  unfamiliar. 
Otherwise  we  should  not  read,  as  we  do  in  Neh.  8:14, 
that  they  "found"  certain  things  written  in  the  Law 
which  was  being  read,  as  a  result  of  which  they  went  for 
material  with  which  to  prepare  booths  (8:16)  in  accord- 
ance with  the  directions  of  the  legislation  of  which  they 
had  just  learned. 

There  is  a  temptation  to  inquire  at  once  why  the  Law 
was  new  to  the  people,  and  how  it  came  about  that  they 
and  their  ancestors  had  not  been  observing  the  rules 
which  the  Law  prescribed.  It  will  be  better,  however, 
to  defer  that  inquiry  till  a  later  time,  when  we  shall  find 
the  study  less  difficult  and  more  fruitful. 

Indeed  now  that  we  have  retraced  the  development 
of  the  Bible  until  we  have  found  ourselves  beyond  the 
mighty  current  which  came  to  be  called  the  Prophets 
and  still  bears  that  significant  name,  it  will  be  to  our 
advantage  to  turn  aside  for  a  moment  from  the  main 
stream  of  scripture  movement  and  growth  that  we  may 
search  for  the  sources  of  the  Prophets  and  discover,  as 
•^vot  we  can,  whence  the  prophetic  writings  came,  how 
they  originated,  and  possibly  something  concerning  the 


22  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

courses  of  events  which  produced  the  second  division  of 
the  Scriptures  of  Israel.  In  the  time  of  the  son  of  Sirach 
this  great  branch  of  Scripture  was  a  well-defined  and 
clearly  understood  collection  of  writings,  as  we  have  seen. 
In  the  days  of  Ezra,  two  centuries  earlier  or  more,  the 
Prophets  are  not  even  referred  to.  It  is  worth  our  while 
to  seek  the  development  of  literary  events  during  that 
period.  We  naturally  turn  to  the  books  of  the  Prophets 
themselves. 


CHAPTER  IV 

SOURCES  OF  THE  PROPHETS 

In  Joshua,  the  first  book  of  the  Prophets,  occurs  the 
well-known  story  according  to  which  Joshua,  the  Israel- 
itish  leader,  commanded  the  sun  and  the  moon  to  stand 
still.  The  language,  chapter  10:12-13,  is  so  significant 
that  it  may  well  be  quoted  in  full.     It  reads  as  follows: 

Then  spake  Joshua  to  Jehovah  in  the  day  when  Jehovah 
delivered  up  the  Amorites  before  the  children  of  Israel;  and  he 
said  in  the  sight  of  Israel, 

Sun,  stand  thou  still  upon  Gibeon; 
And  thou,  Moon,  in  the  valley  of  Aijalon. 
And  the  sun  stood  still,  and  the  moon  stayed, 
Until  the  nation  had  avenged  themselves  of  their  enemies. 
Is  not  this  written  in  the  book  of  Jashar  ? 

Thus  we  are  introduced  to  a  source  from  which  the 
writer  of  our  Book  of  Joshua  drew  some  of  his  material. 
He  had  before  him  a  writing  which  bore  the  title 
"Jashar."  The  word  itself  is  important.  It  means 
''straight,"  or  "right,"  or  "upright,"  as  we  say,  or 
"righteous." 

The  reader  of  our  Revised  Version  observes  also  that 
the  quotation  from  this  Book  of  Jashar  is  poetry. 
Whether  the  entire  book  was  poetical  we  may  not  con- 
clude, but  the  portion  here  preserved  for  us  is  poetical. 
On  the  basis  of  this  quotation  we  should  be  led  to  infer 
that  the  Book  of  Jashar  was  a  poetical  composition  of 
notable  incidents  in  the  history  of  the  Israelitish  people. 

23 


24  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

It  had  been  preserved  and  cherished  until  the  time  of  the 
writing  of  our  Book  of  Joshua. 

Similarly  advantageous  for  us  in  the  study  of  the 
sources  of  the  Prophets  is  the  fact  that  there  is  preserved 
another  quotation  from  the  Book  of  Jashar.  It  is 
longer  than  that  in  Joshua,  but  its  language  is  so  inform- 
ing that  we  need  the  verses  in  full.  Let  us  turn  therefore 
to  II  Sam.  1:17-27,  where  the  poem  as  quoted,  with  its 
introduction  by  the  author  of  Samuel,  reads  as  follows: 

And  David  lamented  with  this  lamentation  over  Saul  and 
over  Jonathan  his  son  (and  he  bade  them  teach  the  children  of 
Judah  the  song  of  the  bow:  behold  it  is  written  in  the  book  of 
Jashar) : 

Thy  glory,  O  Israel,  is  slain  upon  thy  high  places! 

How  are  the  mighty  fallen! 

Tell  it  not  in  Gath, 

Publish  it  not  in  the  streets  of  Ashkelon; 

Lest  the  daughters  of  the  Philistines  rejoice, 

Lest  the  daughters  of  the  imcircumcised  triumph. 

Ye  mountains  of  Gilboa, 

Let  there  be  no  dew  or  rain  upon  you,  neither  fields  of 

offerings : 
For  there  the  shield  of  the  mighty  was  vilely  cast  away, 
The  shield  of  Saul,  not  anointed  with  oil. 
From  the  blood  of  the  slain,  from  the  fat  of  the  mighty, 
The  bow  of  Jonathan  turned  not  back, 
And  the  sword  of  Saul  returned  not  empty. 

Saul  and  Jonathan  were  lovely  and  pleasant  in  their  lives, 

And  in  their  death  they  were  not  divided: 

They  were  swifter  than  eagles. 

They  were  stronger  than  lions. 

Ye  daughters  of  Israel,  weep  over  Saul, 

Who  clothed  you  in  scarlet  delicately, 

Who  put  ornaments  of  gold  upon  your  apparel. 


SOURCES  OF  THE  PROPHETS        25 

How  are  the  mighty  fallen  in  the  midst  of  the  battle! 

Jonathan  is  slain  upon  thy  high  places. 

I  am  distressed  for  thee,  my  brother  Jonathan: 

Very  pleasant  hast  thou  been  unto  me: 

Thy  love  to  me  was  wonderful, 

Passing  the  love  of  women. 

How  are  the  mighty  fallen. 

And  the  weapons  of  war  perished ! 

From  the  reading  we  observe  at  once  some  signifi- 
cant facts,  the  meaning  of  which  it  is  useful  to 
consider. 

Since  both  the  writer  of  Joshua  and  the  writer  of 
Samuel  used  the  Book  of  Jashar  as  a  source,  it  would 
seem  as  though  both  our  Book  of  Joshua  and  that  of 
Samuel  are  later  than  the  Book  of  Jashar. 

Since  the  second  quotation  from  Jashar  is  a  lament 
over  the  death  of  Saul  and  Jonathan,  the  composition 
of  the  Book  of  Jashar  seems  to  have  been  later  than  the 
time  of  Saul  and  his  son,  and  the  Book  of  Joshua  still 
later. 

The  language  introducing  the  lament  appears  to 
carry  us  still  farther,  for  the  author  of  the  Book  of 
Samuel  states  that  ''David  lamented"  over  Saul  and 
Jonathan.  To  the  author  of  Samuel  then  the  days  of 
David,  as  well  as  those  of  Saul  and  his  son,  were  a  period 
already  past ;  and  the  material  before  us  has  the  appear- 
ance of  being  composed  as  late  as  the  close  of  the  life  of 
David.  This  would  mean  that  the  Book  of  Joshua  was 
compiled  after  David  had  died. 

While  this  conclusion  is  the  natural  one,  it  must  not 
be  pressed  too  far.  The  Book  of  Jashar  itself  may  have 
been  a  growth  of  generations,  like  the  entire  Old  Testa- 
ment.    If  it  was,  the  quotation  in  Josh.  10:12-13  ^^V 


26  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

have  been  relatively  early  and  the  lament  over  Saul  and 
Jonathan  much  later.  Conclusive  evidence  concerning 
the  date  of  the  Book  of  Joshua,  therefore,  must  be  sought 
elsewhere  than  in  the  quotation  it  contains  from  the  Book 
of  Jashar. 

Fortunately  the  Book  of  Samuel  includes  other  ma- 
terial which  reveals  something  of  the  literary  situation 
at  the  time  of  David.  There  are  statements  which 
indicate  that  the  writing  of  annals,  or  chronicles,  was  a 
natural  thing,  and  that  these  may  well  have  become 
sources  for  the  compilations  which  were  made  by  later 
authors.  These  statements  are  found  in  II  Sam.  8:i6, 
17  and  20:24,  25.  Ill  the  former  of  these  we  read  that, 
as  a  part  of  the  organization  of  David's  kingdom, 
*'Jehoshaphat  the  son  of  Ahilud  was  recorder,"  that 
is,  an  ofiEicer  who  kept  a  record  of  affairs,  perhaps  what 
we  should  call  a  chronicler,  as  the  margin  of  the  Revised 
Version  proposes  the  alternative  translation.  As  a 
part  of  the  same  political  arrangement  "Seraiah  was 
scribe,"  that  is,  an  ofl&cial  similar  to  the  secretary  with 
us  who  would  preserve  the  events  of  the  life  of  the  king 
and  his  affairs  in  a  more  personal  way.  In  20:24,  25 
a  similar  statement  is  made,  except  that  the  name  of  the 
"scribe"  is  Sheva.  The  records  prepared  by  these 
offfcials  would  easily  become,  at  a  later  time,  the  data 
for  composing  portions  of  such  accounts  as  have  come 
down  to  us  in  the  Prophets. 

There  is  one  other  phrase  in  the  introduction  to  the 
second  quotation  from  the  Book  of  Jashar  which  ought 
to  receive  a  moment  of  attention.  It  is  in  verse  18: 
"And  he  bade  them  teach  the  children  of  Judah  the  song 
of  the  bow."     The  term  "Judah"  in  the  time  later  than 


SOURCES  OF  THE  PROPHETS  27 

the  life  of  David  most  naturally  belongs  to  the  period 
after  the  division  of  the  Israelitish  nation  following  the 
death  of  Solomon;  its  use  earlier  would  have  been  quite 
surprising.  Apparently,  therefore,  the  language  of  this 
account  of  the  death  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  indicates  that 
the  Book  of  Samuel  was  written  after  the  kingdom  of 
Judah  had  become  separate  and  the  use  of  the  name 
Judah  had  become  matter  of  fact. 

In  the  Book  of  Judges  also  we  find  suggestions  of  the 
use  of  sources.  One  of  these  instances  is  in  the  first 
chapter,  verses  11  and  12.  The  author,  in  describing 
the  career  of  Judah,  relates  that  he  went  against  the 
inhabitants  of  "Debir."  The  author  is  aware,  however, 
that  the  source  before  him  has  as  the  name  of  that  place 
"Kiriath-sepher,"  so  he  prepares  his  readers  to  under- 
stand the  location  by  the  use  of  a  parenthesis,  "Now  the 
name  of  Debir  beforetime  was  Kiriath-sepher " ;  and 
he  then  uses  the  source  without  changing  the  name,  so 
that  both  of  the  names  stand  as  a  part  of  the  text.  In 
Judg.  7 : 1  there  is  a  similar  explanation  of  the  name 
Jerubbaal  as  equivalent  to  Gideon. 

The  story  of  Deborah  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  chapters 
of  Judges  is  familiar.  The  reader  of  the  Revised  Version 
has  noted  that,  while  chapter  4  is  prose,  the  Song  of 
Deborah  in  the  fifth  chapter,  as  this  title  itself  implies,  is 
in  poetry.  To  the  casual  reader  the  relation  of  the  song 
to  the  prose  account  in  chapter  4  may  not  be  apparent. 
If,  however,  one  pauses  thoughtfully  in  the  reading  of 
the  fourth  chapter  he  will  discover  that  it  contains  a 
completed  narrative  of  the  event  under  discussion. 
Likewise  in  chapter  5  one  finds  a  full  account  of  the 
events,  but  here  presented  in  the  dress  of  poetry.     The 


28  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

suggestion  at  once  offers  itself  that  the  author  of  our 
Book  of  Judges  had  before  him  both  a  prose  and  a  poetic 
account  of  the  episode  of  Deborah,  incorporated  them, 
one  following  the  other,  in  his  narrative,  and  gave  them 
the  editorial  setting  which  has  remained  until  our  time  a 
story  of  the  highest  literary  charm. 

If  now  we  turn  to  the  fourth  book  of  the  Prophets, 
namely,  our  two  Books  of  Kings  as  a  single  book,  we 
may  discover  other  traces  of  the  composition  of  the  work 
out  of  previously  existing  sources.  For  example,  we 
read  in  I  Kings  11:41,  "Now  the  rest  of  the  acts  of 
Solomon,  and  all  that  he  did,  and  his  wisdom,  are  they 
not  written  in  the  book  of  the  acts  of  Solomon  ?  "  The 
form  of  statement  suggests  that,  while  the  account  of 
Solomon's  reign  as  given  in  our  Book  of  Kings  is  some- 
what full,  there  was  a  much  more  extended  narrative  in 
the  book  of  the  acts  of  Solomon,  from  which  the  author 
of  Kings  had  made  only  excerpts.  It  is  manifest  also 
that  the  author  of  our  Book  of  Kings  was  writing 
at  a  date  some  time  later  than  the  reign  of  the  wise 
king. 

In  I  Kings  14:29,  15:7  and  23  we  find  a  reference  to 
"the  book  of  the  chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Judah." 
This  source  is  likewise  mentioned  in  II  Kings  23:28. 
In  I  Kings  15:31  and  16:5  there  are  similar  references  to 
"the  book  of  the  chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Israel." 
The  form  of  phrase  in  each  class  of  references  is  that 
which  would  be  expected  after  there  had  been  the  lapse 
of  sufficient  time  for  each  of  the  two  kingdoms  to  write 
its  own  history,  and  for  these  histories  to  be  used  by  the 
author  of  our  Books  of  Kings.  We  are  thus  carried  along 
to  the  period  of  the  Babylonian  exile  as  that  out  of 


SOURCES  OF  THE  PROPHETS  29 

which  "the  book  of  the  chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Israel" 
and  also  ''the  book  of  the  chronicles  of  the  kings  of 
Judah"  arose;  and  only  some  time  later  than  that 
would  they  be  combined  into  the  interwoven  narrative 
preserved  for  us. 

It  does  not  follow  from  the  foregoing,  of  course,  that 
merely  such  sources  as  we  have  observed  were  combined 
to  furnish  the  writings  we  possess.  The  source  hints  we 
have  considered  are  only  some  that  are  obvious,  apparent 
on  the  surface  of  the  historical  composition.  There  may 
be  many  other  sources,  hidden  springs,  as  it  were,  yet 
contributing  largely  to  the  fulness  of  the  scripture 
current.  Traces  of  these  we  may  find  later.  The 
important  thing  at  present  is  to  recognize  how  the 
"earlier  prophets"  were  written  by  men  who  made  free 
use  of  previous  writings,  some  of  which  were  poetry  and 
others  the  result  of  the  activities  of  annalist  officials 
attached  to  the  royal  house  and  charged  to  preserve 
accounts  of  national  or  personal  affairs.  We  should  very 
much  like  to  see  those  primitive  documents,  but  we  are 
fortunate  in  possessing  so  much  of  their  contents  in  the 
later  compilations. 

When  we  turn  to  the  "later  prophets,"  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  Twelve,  we  find  traces  of 
similar  use  of  documentary  sources.  We  might  not 
expect  this  in  the  writings  of  the  great  prophetic  leaders 
of  Israel,  yet  the  pages  of  these  books  make  it  easily 
seen. 

In  the  Book  of  Isaiah  there  are  various  indications 
of  the  editorial  work  through  which  its  pages  have 
passed.  For  example,  we  may  compare  the  title  of  the 
book  (chap.  1:1)  and  the  first  verse  of  chapter  2  with 


30  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

the  language  of  the  first  verse  of  chapter  6.  Here  is  the 
parallel  they  give : 

ISA.  i:i  ISA.  6: 1 

The  vision  of  Isaiah  the  son  of  In  the  year  that  king  Uzziah 

Amoz,  which  he  saw  concerning  died  I  saw  the  Lord  sitting  upon  a 

Judah  and  Jerusalem,  in  the  days  throne,  high  and  lifted  up;    and 

of    Uzziah,    Jotham,    Ahaz,    and  his  train  filled  the  temple. 
Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah. 

ISA.  2:1 

The  word  that  Isaiah  the  son  of 
Amoz  saw  concerning  Judah  and 
Jerusalem. 

In  the  first  two  passages  we  have  the  language  of  an 
editor,  a  later  writer  than  the  prophet,  who  is  bringing 
together  and  arranging  the  messages  which  the  prophet 
had  spoken.  In  chapter  6  the  prophet  himself  is  speak- 
ing; his  personality  comes  out  with  vividness  and  force 
through  the  personal  pronoun  "I,"  and  we  feel  ourselves 
in  his  presence. 

If  the  reader  will  compare  7 : 3  and  8:1  in  a  similar 
way  he  will  see  again  the  work  of  an  editor  and  the 
language  of  the  prophet  himself.  Other  examples  of  the 
same  kind  might  easily  be  given. 

A  somewhat  different  use  of  sources,  more  like  that 
in  the  "earlier  prophets,"  is  to  be  found  in  37 :  21,  where 
we  read,  "Then  Isaiah  the  son  of  Amoz  sent  unto 
Hezekiah,  saying.  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  the  God  of 
Israel,"  the  opening  words  being  those  of  the  editor, 
followed  by  the  beginning  of  the  message  which  had  been 
delivered  by  the  prophet  and  is  now  combined  with 
other  messages  into  the  book  as  it  stands. 

In  38 : 1 ,  9,  and  2 1  we  have  three  examples  of  somewhat 
the  same  type.     The  reader  should  examine  them  in  the 


SOURCES  OF  THE  PROPHETS  31 

context  for  himself.  The  fact  that  38 :  10-20  is  poetry, 
introduced  by  verse  9  as  "the  writing  of  Hezekiah  the 
king  of  Judah,  when  he  had  been  sick,  and  was  recovered 
of  his  sickness,"  shows  in  a  marked  degree  the  similarity 
of  the  use  of  sources  here  and  in  the  Book  of  Joshua,  as 
we  have  considered  above  (p.  23). 

The  editorial  work  in  the  Book  of  Isaiah  is  revealed 
even  more  strikingly  in  the  account  of  the  mission  of 
Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  as  described  in  chapters  44  and  45. 
To  feel  the  full  force  of  this  one  needs  to  re-read  the 
historical  narrative  in  chapter  39  and  note  the  striking 
change  in  the  form  of  thought  and  language  as  the 
reading  proceeds  to  chapter  40,  a  change  so  abrupt, and 
marked  that  one  feels  that  he  has  passed,  as  evidently 
he  has  passed,  from  one  class  of  writing  to  another 
entirely  different.  The  entire  situation  has  taken  new 
form.  We  feel  that  there  is  no  connection  between  the 
two  chapters  other  than  the  mere  collocation  of  two 
distinct  works.  The  work  of  the  editor,  even  if  he  were 
the  prophet  himself,  has  been  nothing  more  than  the 
placing  of  the  diverse  messages  next  to  each  other.  One 
feels  that  more  probably  we  have  here  two  wholly 
distinct  works  which,  for  reasons  which  we  do  not  now 
know,  have  been  brought  together  into  a  single  book. 

When  we  arrive  at  chapter  44,  accordingly,  and  find 
in  the  latter  part  of  it  (vs.  28)  how  Cyrus  the  king,  who 
lived  nearly  two  centuries  after  the  prophet  Isaiah,  is 
pictured  as  the  shepherd  of  Jehovah,  and  in  45 :  i  as  the 
anointed  of  Jehovah,  we  are  not  so  surprised.  Our 
previous  discovery  that  the  Book  of  Isaiah  as  a  whole 
is  an  editorial  compilation  has  prepared  us  to  see  that  the 
compiling  may  have  occurred  much  later  than  the  days 


32  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  the  prophet  Isaiah,  that  such  prophetic  messages  as 
we  have  in  the  later  chapters  of  this  book  may  easily 
have  been  the  divine  voice  of  later  prophets,  unnamed 
in  the  writings,  and  that  their  messages  were  com- 
bined with  those  of  the  great  preacher  of  the  days  of 
Hezekiah. 

The  editorial  marks  which  we  have  observed  in  the 
Book  of  Isaiah  are  equally  evident  in  the  prophecy  of 
Jeremiah.  A  clear  instance  is  discernible  in  the  opening 
verses  of  the  first  chapter,  where  the  first  verse  is  part 
of  the  title  given  to  the  book  by  the  later  hand  of  the 
editor,  while  verse  4  introduces  us  to  the  personal  message 
from  the  prophet  himself,  and  verses  11  and  13  are 
similar  and  typical  affirmations  with  which  he  introduces 
other  oracles.  In  18:  i  we  find  a  further  example  of  the 
editorial  introduction,  and  in  18:5  of  the  prophetic 
message. 

Chapter  25: 13  gives  additional  evidence  of  a  slightly 
different  sort.  In  the  midst  of  the  prophet's  message 
there  is  inserted  the  solemn  declaration  that  "all  that 
is  written  in  this  book,  which  Jeremiah  hath  prophesied 
against  all  the  nations"  will  be  brought  to  pass,  a  state- 
ment which  obviously  belongs  to  a  time  after  the  oracles 
of  Jeremiah  had  been  collected. 

Perhaps  the  most  suggestive  material  in  the  Book  of 
Jeremiah,  however,  is  contained  in  chapter  36.  It  is 
too  extended  to  reproduce  in  full.  One  should  turn  to 
the  book  and  read  carefully  the  entire  narrative.  He 
will  thus  be  impressed  with  the  function  of  the  prophet's 
amanuensis;  and  he  will  readily  observe  that  the  form 
of  speech  may  have  been  largely  influenced,  particularly 
in  the  introductory  and  connective  statements,  by  the 


SOURCES  OF  THE  PROPHETS  33 

hand  of  the  prophet's  assistant  rather  than  by  the 
prophet  himself.  When  with  this  obvious  fact  we  place 
the  traces  of  later  editorial  adjustment  also,  the  way  is 
open  for  understanding  without  difficulty  how  the  book 
as  it  has  come  to  us  is  the  last  stage  in  a  series  of  natural 
changes.  This  result  is  especially  marked  in  the  case  of 
the  Book  of  Jeremiah  for  those  who  take  occasion  to 
compare  our  English  version,  or  its  Hebrew  original,  with 
the  Greek  translation  as  we  have  it  in  the  Septuagint,  or 
the  English  translation  of  the  Septuagint.  The  Septu- 
agint reveals  a  striking  rearrangement  of  the  material 
of  the  English  version. 

The  Book  of  Jeremiah  furnishes,  in  chapter  52: 1-27, 
an  opportunity  beyond  any  other  of  the  prophets  for  an 
unusual  consideration  of  source  material.  This  oppor- 
tunity reveals  itself  if  the  student,  with  the  foregoing 
passage  before  him,  will  turn  to  II  Kings  24: 18 — 25 :  21, 
where  he  will  find  the  entire  passage  duplicated  in  almost 
the  same  words  throughout.  Such  a  duplication  is  of 
course  no  accident,  nor  is  it  a  mere  coincidence.  Evi- 
dently both  of  the  narratives  are  taken  from  a  common 
source,  or  one  of  them  from  the  other.  Also  the  student 
should  not  overlook  the  closing  sentence  of  the  fifty-first 
chapter  of  the  prophecy,  ''Thus  far  are  the  words  of 
Jeremiah."  This  statement  is  obviously  the  language  of 
a  later  editor,  who  then  closes  the  book,  chapter  52,  with 
a  selection,  part  of  which  serves  the  purpose  of  the 
compiler  of  our  Book  of  Kings  in  a  similar  connection. 
How  long  after  the  career  of  Jeremiah  this  editorial  work 
was  done  there  is  little  in  the  book  itself  to  assure. 

We  turn  now  to  the  prophecy  of  Ezekiel,  wondering 
whether  we  shall  meet  traces  of  the  hand  of  the  compiler 


34  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

as  we  have  in  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah.  We  are  made  aware 
at  once  that  the  form  of  composition  is  different.  At  the 
opening  of  Ezekiel  there  is  no  extended  and  formal  title, 
such  as  that  with  which  the  other  books  have  been 
provided.  It  is  the  prophet  himself  who  speaks;  and 
his  language  is  like  that  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  where 
their  messages  have  not  been  edited  by  the  hand  of  the 
compiler.  As  far  as  we  may  infer  from  the  form  of  the 
book  which  bears  the  name  of  Ezekiel,  it  has  come  to  us 
in  quite  the  literary  structure  given  it  by  the  prophet. 

In  the  Twelve,  the  writings  which  in  our  English 
version  we  have  learned  to  call  the  Minor  Prophets,  we 
may  expect  to  find  repetition  of  the  characteristics 
revealed  by  the  works  already  considered;  and  our 
expectations  will  not  be  disappointed.  I  shall  not  take 
space  to  reproduce  the  various  instances  in  these  twelve 
brief  writings  which  show  both  the  personal  messages  of 
the  divine  messengers  and  the  marks  of  editors,  or  com- 
pilers, through  whose  hands  portions  of  the  messages 
have  manifestly  passed.  In  general,  the  opening  verses 
of  each  book  give  evidence  of  the  compiler's  handling  of 
the  prophetic  material  which  he  found.  The  Book  of 
Jonah,  however,  is  regularly  a  narrative  in  the  third 
person,  as  though  the  hero  of  the  work  had  no  part  in 
its  composition  other  than  to  furnish  the  material  which 
the  author  fashioned  into  the  masterpiece  which  we  have 
inherited.  In  the  Book  of  Zechariah,  on  the  other  hand, 
we  have,  between  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  chapters,  a 
change  of  thought  and  form  almost  as  abrupt  as  that  at 
the  close  of  the  thirty-ninth  chapter  of  Isaiah.  Sufficient 
examples  of  the  various  characteristics  which  we  have 
previously  considered  will  offer  themselves  to  any  who 


SOURCES  OF  THE  PROPHETS  35 

desire  to  pursue  the  study  through  the  several  books  as 
they  stand. 

It  would  be  highly  interesting  to  know  when  and 
where  the  literary  processes  which  we  have  been  observ- 
ing began,  and  when  they  ceased.  The  work  of  some  of 
the  prophets  and  other  writers  and  the  time  of  their 
messages,  as  well  as  the  sphere  of  their  activities,  we 
can  ascertain  with  considerable  certainty.  David  died 
probably  about  loio  B.C.  That  the  prophetic  activity 
of  Amos  may  be  placed  in  about  the  middle  of  the  eighth 
century,  closing  perhaps  near  745  B.C.,  and  was  followed 
by  the  labors  of  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Micah  before  the  year 
700,  is  reasonably  sure.  That  Jeremiah  had  his  dis- 
tinguished career  a  little  more  than  a  century  later, 
dying  possibly  about  585,  and  was  followed  in  the  next 
generation  by  Ezekiel,  we  may  accept  as  substantially 
correct.  Haggai  and  Zechariah  clearly  belong  to  the 
close  of  the  exile,  about  520  B.C.,  and  Malachi  appears 
to  have  a  place  two  or  three  generations  later.  For  most 
of  the  others  the  days  in  which  they  spoke  are  painfully 
uncertain.  Conjectures  have  of  course  been  made,  and 
the  dates  proposed  may  be  found  in  the  commentaries  or 
other  similar  discussions.  For  the  purposes  of  this  study 
such  uncertainties  are  of  little  value.  We  are  concerned 
primarily  with  the  processes  through  which  the  writings 
passed. 

Even  less  sure  than  the  times  of  composition  of  the 
originals  are  the  times,  or  periods,  when  the  compihng 
and  final  editing  of  each  of  the  composite  works  occurred. 
As  some  of  the  sources,  particularly  the  poems,  which 
later  were  woven  into  the  Prophets  are  clearly  ancient 
and  early  took  the  literary  form  which  their  authors 


36  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

conceived,  so  it  is  equally  certain  that  some  of  the  final 
literary  labors  which  we  have  inherited  belong  to  the 
period  of  the  exile  or  later. 

As  to  the  time  when  the  several  writings,  in  their 
completed  form,  were  collected  and  received  the  sacred 
impress  by  which  they  became  thereafter  and  still  remain 
the  Prophets,  we  are  left  wholly  in  doubt,  other  than  that 
the  evidence  of  the  son  of  Sirach,  as  we  have  viewed  it  in 
chapter  ii,  makes  sure  this  achievement  as  early  as  about 
200  B.C.  It  may  have  been  some  time  previous  to  that, 
but  we  cannot  so  assert.  It  cannot  have  been  as  early 
as  the  days  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  at  the  middle  of  the 
fifth  century,  for  the  Law  alone  at  that  time  received  the 
sacred  distinction.  Fortunately  our  benefit  from  the  use 
of  the  Prophets  does  not  hinge,  in  any  degree,  on  our 
lack  of  knowledge  in  this  matter. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  TIME  OF 
JEREMIAH  AND  JOSIAH 

(About  620  B.C.) 

Before  we  retrace  farther  the  course  of  the  growth  of 
the  Old  Testament  it  will  be  of  service  to  recall  briefly 
what  we  have  discovered  thus  far. 

In  chapter  i  we  saw  how,  in  the  days  of  Jesus  and 
Paul,  the  Old  Testament  consisted  chiefly  of  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets,  together  with  large  use  of  the  Psalms 
and  the  Book  of  Daniel  and  some  slight  reference  to 
others  of  the  Writings,  principally  Proverbs.  Some  two 
centuries  earlier,  in  the  time  of  the  son  of  Sirach,  the 
situation  was  much  the  same,  larger  consideration, 
apparently,  being  given  by  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  to  the 
books  outside  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  Following 
the  stream  of  sacred  thought  still  farther  toward  its 
source,  we  discovered  that,  under  the  leadership  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah,  about  450  B.C.,  the  people  accepted  the 
Law  only,  no  reference  being  made  to  the  Prophets, 
though  the  occasion  was  such  as  to  make  that  reference 
most  natural  if  the  second  division  of  the  Old  Testament 
had  then  been  recognized  as  a  part  of  the  sacred  books  of 
the  nation.  From  our  study  in  chapter  iv,  however,  it 
has  been  clear  that,  though  the  Prophets  had  not  become 
a  definite  collection  of  accepted  Scripture  as  early  as  the 
fifth  century  B.C.,  many  of  the  individual  books  of  the 

37 


38  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Prophets,  if  not  all  of  them,  though  perhaps  not  in 
the  complete  form  in  which  we  possess  the  books,  were 
composed  and  more  or  less  known  at  that  date,  or  at 
least  the  sources  out  of  which  they  were  compiled  were 
ready  for  that  use. 

We  retrace  the  course  of  development  one  stage 
farther,  therefore,  fully  conscious  that,  whatever  we  find 
the  main  current  to  be,  there  are  lesser  streams  about  us, 
either  already  contributing  to  the  main  flow  of  the 
thought  of  national  religious  life  or  opening  into  it  at 
points  nearer  the  source,  where  we  shall  meet  them  as 
we  proceed. 

In  this  next  step  we  are  favored,  as  we  have  been  in 
each  of  the  preceding  steps,  with  highly  important 
material  from  the  Bible  itself  to  direct  our  way.  It  is 
found  in  the  twenty-second  and  twenty-third  chapters 
of  the  Second  Book  of  Kings.  The  language  is  so  im- 
portant that  the  more  relevant  portions  require  repro- 
ducing here  in  full,  beginning  at  22:3. 

And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  king  Josiah,  that 
the  king  sent  Shaphan  ....  the  scribe,  to  the  house  of  Jehovah, 
saying,  Go  up  to  Hilkiah  the  high  priest 

And  Hilkiah  the  high  priest  said  unto  Shaphan  the  scribe,  I 
have  found  the  book  of  the  law  in  the  house  of  Jehovah.  And 
Hilkiah  delivered  the  book  to  Shaphan,  and  he  read  it.    And 

Shaphan  the  scribe  came  to  the  king And  Shaphan  the 

scribe  told  the  king,  saying,  Hilkiah  the  priest  hath  delivered  me  a 
book.  And  Shaphan  read  it  before  the  king.  And  it  came  to 
pass,  when  the  king  had  heard  the  words  of  the  book  of  the  law, 
that  he  rent  his  clothes 

There  follows  (22: 12  and  on  through  much  of  chap.  23) 
the  somewhat  detailed  account  of  the  effect  which  this 
event  produced  on  the  king  and,  under  his  leadership, 


JEREMIAH  AND  JOSIAH  AND  OLD  TESTAMENT     39 

on  the  affairs  of  the  kingdom,  amounting  to  what  we 
have  come  to  call  the  reformation  under  Josiah,  about 
620  B.C. 

As  we  examine  the  passage  there  is  no  indication  that 
the  reading  of  the  Law  on  this  occasion  required  con- 
siderable time.  Though  the  book  which  was  brought 
to  the  king  and  later  read  before  the  people  is  called  the 
Law,  just  as  that  which  was  read  by  Ezra  and  his 
associates  nearly  two  centuries  later  was  called  the  Law, 
there  is  no  mention  here  that  the  reading  extended  to 
even  a  second  day;  and  the  impression  given  by  a  study 
of  the  passage  is  that  the  book  was  read  twice  in  a  single 
day,  and  that  these  readings  were  only  two  of  several 
important  incidents  which  the  day  involved.  Even 
if  it  be  assumed  that  these  two  readings  of  the  Law  were 
on  different  days,  the  account  leaves  no  doubt  that  the 
book  which  was  brought  to  King  Josiah  was  brief  in 
comparison  with  that  which  Ezra  and  his  associates  read 
and  explained  to  their  fellow-Israelites. 

Obviously  it  is  important  then  to  discover  the  con- 
tents of  this  Law  which  had  been  presented  to  the 
nation.  In  this  effort  the  method  of  comparison  is  once 
more  our  proper  and  fruitful  course,  and  we  can  make 
the  comparison  because  the  account  in  Kings  offers 
specific  references  to  the  Law  as  Josiah  had  learned  of. 
its  demands  and  was  putting  it  into  execution.  It  is 
possible  accordingly  to  follow  up  the  references  and 
learn  of  the  book  of  the  Law  to  which  they  point.  Some 
parallels  taken  from  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  and  the 
Second  Book  of  Kings  will  aid  in  revealing  the  situation. 
The  first  has  to  do  with  the  Israelitish  worship  of  other 
gods  than  Jehovah. 


40 


HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 


II  Kings  22:17 
Because  they  have  forsaken  me, 
and  have  burned  incense  unto 
other  gods,  that  they  might  pro- 
voke me  to  anger  with  all  the 
works  of  their  hands,  therefore 
my  wrath  shall  be  kindled  against 
this  place,  and  it  shall  not  be 
quenched. 


Deut.  29:25-27 
Then  men  shall  say,  Because 
they  forsook  the  covenant  of 
Jehovah,  the  God  of  their  fathers, 
which  he  made  with  them  when  he 
brought  them  forth  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt,  and  went  and  served 
other  gods,  and  worshipped  them, 
gods  that  they  knew  not,  and  that 
he  had  not  given  unto  them: 
therefore  the  anger  of  Jehovah  was 
kindled  against  this  land,  to  bring 
upon  it  all  the  curse  that  is  written 
in  this  book: 

The  reading  of  the  two  passages  easily  shows  that  the 
second  grows  out  of  the  first.  That  which  was  indicated 
in  the  language  of  Deuteronomy  found  its  fulfilment  in 
the  situation  described  in  Kings.  To  the  extent  of  this 
parallel  then  we  may  infer  that  the  Law  found  in  the 
Temple  was  represented  in  our  Book  of  Deuteronomy. 

Another  incident  mentioned  in  II  Kings  (23 : 1-2) 
points  to  a  requirement  of  the  Law  according  to  which 
the  people  were  to  assemble  for  the  reading  of  its  pre- 
cepts; and  in  Deuteronomy  we  find  such  a  requirement. 
Note  the  parallel: 


Deut.  31:  lo-ii 
And  Moses  commanded  them, 
saying,  At  the  end  of  every  seven 
years,  in  the  set  time  of  the  year 
of  release,  in  the  feast  of  taber- 
nacles, when  all  Israel  is  come  to 
appear  before  Jehovah  thy  God 
in  the  place  which  he  shall  choose, 
thou  shalt  read  this  law  before  all 
Israel  in  their  hearing. 


II  Kings  23:1-2 
And  the  king  sent,  and  they 
gathered  unto  him  all  the  elders 
of  Judah  and  of  Jerusalem.  And 
the  king  went  up  to  the  house  of 
Jehovah,  and  all  the  men  of  Judah 
and  all  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusa- 
lem with  him,  and  the  priests,  and 
the  prophets,  and  all  the  people, 
both  small  and  great :  and  he  read 
in  their  ears  all  the  words  of  the 
book  of  the  covenant  which  was 
found  in  the  house  of  Jehovah. 


JEREMIAH  AND  JOSIAH  AND  OLD  TESTAMENT     41 

The  quotation  from  Kings  readily  witnesses  that  the 
king  was  carrying  out  the  command  embodied  in  the 
language  of  Deuteronomy.  Once  more  then  the  Law 
of  the  time  of  Josiah  seems  to  correspond  with  the 
legislation  of  our  Book  of  Deuteronomy. 

A  further  striking  similarity  between  the  command  of 
Deuteronomy  and  the  action  of  Josiah  as  stated  in  Kings 
is  found  in  these  verses: 


Deut.  13:4 

Ye  shall  walk  after  Jehovah 
your  God,  and  fear  him,  and  keep 
his  commandments,  and  obey  his 
voice,  and  ye  shall  serve  him  and 
cleave  unto  him. 


II  Kings  23:3 

And  the  king  stood  by  the 
pillar,  and  made  a  covenant 
before  Jehovah,  to  walk  after 
Jehovah,  and  to  keep  his  com- 
mandments, and  his  testimonies, 
and  his  statutes,  with  all  his  heart, 
and  with  all  his  soul,  to  confirm 
the  words  of  this  covenant  that 
were  written  in  this  book: 


A  like  parallelism  in  language  and  thought  concerning 
the  destruction  of  forbidden  forms  of  worship  is  found 
in  the  following  verses: 


Deut.  7:5 

Ye  shall  break  down  their 
altars,  and  dash  in  pieces  their 
pillars,  and  hew  down  their 
Asherim,  and  burn  their  graven 
images  with  fire. 


II  Kings  23:14 

And  he  brake  in  pieces  the 
pillars,  and  cut  down  the  Asherim, 
and  filled  their  places  with  the 
bones  of  men. 


The  reader  does  not  need  to  be  urged  to  recognize  how 
the  language  of  Kings  is  specifically  a  description  of  the 
action  which  resulted  from  carrying  out  the  requirement 
of  Deuteronomy. 


42  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

The  dependence  of  Josiah's  reformation  upon  the 
legislation  of  Deuteronomy  may  be  aptly  illustrated  in 
at  least  one  more  parallel.  Here  are  the  words  from 
Deuteronomy  and  those  from  Kings  which  wait  to 
furnish  the  evidence: 

Deut.  i8:io-ii  II  Kings  23:24 

There  shall  not  be  found  with  Moreover      them      that      had 

thee  any  one  that  makes  his  son  familiar  spirits,  and  the  wizards, 

or  his  daughter  to  pass  through  and  the  teraphim,  and  the  idols, 

fire,  one  that  useth  divination,  one  and  all  the  abominations  that  were 

that    practiseth    augury,    or    an  seen  in  the  land  of  Judah  and  in 

enchanter,    or    a    sorcerer,    or    a  Jerusalem,  did  Josiah  put  away, 

charmer,  or  a  consulter  with  a  that  he  might  confirm  the  words  of 

familiar  spirit,  or  a  wizard,  or  a  the  law  which  were  written  in  the 

necromancer.  book  that  Hilkiah  the  priest  found 

in  the  house  of  Jehovah. 

Thus  all  the  references  in  Kings  to  the  Law  found  in 
the  Temple  seem  to  be  references  to  our  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy. This  selection  of  passages  from  Deuteronomy 
is  made  not  from  choice  but  from  necessity.  There  are 
no  such  close  parallels  between  the  account  in  Kings  and 
the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch  as  there  are  between 
Kings  and  Deuteronomy.  While  phrases  here  and  there 
in  the  Pentateuchal  books  other  than  Deuteronomy  bear 
resemblance  to  the  Kings  narrative  telling  of  the  reform 
of  Josiah,  the  reader  will  have  great  difficulty  in  dis- 
covering outside  of  Deuteronomy  any  evident  basis  for 
the  reform  activities.  The  reform  was  carried  out  in 
accordance  with  the  legislation  which  Deuteronomy 
presents. 

It  is  readily  seen,  therefore,  from  the  evidence  of  the 
Bible  material  that  in  the  time  of  Josiah  the  Law  was  a 
brief  document  in  comparison  with  the  Law  in  the  days 


JEREMIAH  AND  JOSIAH  AND  OLD  TESTAMENT    43 

of  Ezra,  and  it  is  equally  clear  that  the  Law  of  the  earlier 
period  was  a  considerable  part  at  least  of  our  Book  of 
Deuteronomy.  It  was  our  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  or 
portions  of  it,  which  was  found  in  the  house  of  Jehovah 
in  the  eighteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Josiah. 

The  days  of  Josiah  are  the  days  of  Jeremiah  the 
prophet  also,  Jeremiah  having  begun  his  ministry  in  the 
thirteenth  year  of  this  king  (Jer.  1:2).  He  was  therefore 
entering  upon  his  distinguished  career  when  the  Law  was 
found.  In  view  of  this  a  comparison  of  the  message  of 
Jeremiah  with  the  events  narrated  in  Kings  and  the 
instructions  of  Deuteronomy  is  fitting  and  likely  to  be 
suggestive. 

Such  comparison  may  best  be  made  perhaps  by 
reading  sufficient  of  Deuteronomy  to  be  impressed  with 
its  thought  and  language,  then  reading  again  the  account 
of  Josiah's  reform  in  the  Book  of  Kings,  and  following 
these  with  the  reading  of  considerable  portions  of  the 
earlier  chapters  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.  One  who  does 
this  will  recognize  easily  that  the  three  narratives  have 
the  same  underlying  ideas  and  often  present  them  in 
similar  language.  If  with  Kings  and  Jeremiah  one  reads 
from  the  legislation  as  contained  in  Exodus  and  Leviticus, 
however,  he  will  not  discover  the  same  marked  similarity 
that  reveals  itself  between  Jeremiah  and  Deuteronomy. 

In  addition  to  this  general  comparison,  specific  in- 
stances of  likeness  are  to  be  noted.  In  Jer.  19:3-4  the 
prophet  is  speaking  as  though  the  words  of  Huldah 
the  prophetess  in  II  Kings  22:17-16  were  his  own;  and 
the  language  of  both  is  readily  seen  to  depend  on  that 
found  in  Deut.  29:25-27,  as  the  following  parallel 
shows: 


44 


HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 


Deut.  29:25-27 
Then  men  shall  say,  Be- 
cause they  forsook  the 
covenant  of  Jehovah,  the 
God  of  their  fathers,  which 
he  made  with  them  when 
he  brought  them  forth  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and 
went  and  served  other  gods, 
and  worshipped  them,  gods 
that  they  knew  not,  and 
that  he  had  not  given  unto 
them:  therefore  the  anger 
of  Jehovah  was  kindled 
against  this  land,  to  bring 
upon  it  all  the  curse  that  is 
written  in  this  book; 


II  Kings  22:16,  17 
Thus  saith  Jehovah,  Be- 
hold, I  will  bring  evil  upon 
this  place,  and  upon  the 
inhabitants  thereof,  even 
all  the  words  of  the  book 
which  the  king  of  Judah 
hath  read.  Because  they 
have  forsaken  me,  and  have 
burned  incense  unto  other 
gods,  that  they  might  pro- 
voke me  to  anger  with  all 
the  works  of  their  hands, 
therefore  my  wrath  is 
kindled  against  this  place, 
and  it  shall  not  be 
quenched. 


Jer. 19:3, 4 
Hear  ye  the  word  of 
Jehovah,  O  kings  of  Judah 
and  inhabitants  of  Jerusa- 
lem: Thus  saith  Jehovah 
of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel, 
Behold,  I  will  bring  evil 
upon  this  place,  which  who- 
soever heareth,  his  ears 
shall  tingle.  Because  they 
have  forsaken  me,  and 
have  estranged  this  place, 
and  have  burned  incense 
in  it  unto  other  gods,  that 
they  knew  not,  they  and 
their  fathers  and  the  kings 
of  Judah,  and  have  filled 
this  place  with  the  blood  of 
innocents 

In  a  similar  way  we  should  read  together  Deut.  7:5, 
II  Kings  23:14,  and  Jer.  17:1,  2. 

Jer.  17:1,  2 
The  sin  of  Judah  is 
written  with  a  pen  of  iron, 
and  with  the  point  of  a 
diamond:  it  is  graven  upon 
the  tablet  of  their  heart, 
and  upon  the  horns  of  your 
altars;  whilst  their  children 
remember  their  altars  and 
their  Asherim  by  the  green 
trees  upon  the  high  hills. 

In  Deuteronomy  the  admonition  is  given,  in  Kings  the 
humble  monarch  responds  with  thorough  literalness,  and 
in  the  language  of  the  prophet  is  graphically  portrayed 
the  sin  of  those  who  are  ignoring  the  warning  which  has 
been  uttered. 

Similar  parallels  may  be  made  from  the  following 
passages,  the  comparison  of  which  I  leave  to  the  interest 
of  the  reader  to  make.  In  Jer.  22:3  the  prophet  speaks 
as  though  the  words  of  Deut.  10:17-18  were  directly  in 
this  thought.     The  words  in  Jer.  11:3-4  are  a  distinct 


Deut.  7:3 
But  thus  shall  ye  deal 
with  them:  ye  shall  break 
down  their  altars,  and  dash 
in  pieces  their  pillars,  and 
hew  down  their  Asherim, 
and  burn  their  graven 
images  with  fire. 


II  Kings  23:14 
And  he  brake  in  pieces 
the  pillars,  and  cut  down 
the  Asherim,  and  filled 
their  places  with  the  bones 
of  men. 


JEREMIAH  AND  JOSIAH  AND  OLD  TESTAMENT     45 

echo  of  the  warning  of  Deut.  27:26  made  more  effective 
by  combining  with  the  Israelitish  experience  so  vividly 
portrayed  in  Deut.  4:20,  and  Jer.  19:13  pictures  the 
inevitable  outcome  of  disregarding  the  teaching  laid 
down  in  Deut.  4:19. 

Thus  the  material  furnished  by  the  Book  of  Jeremiah 
further  indicates  that  the  Law  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah 
and  Josiah  was  a  book  similar  to  our  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy. In  discovering  this  we  have  not  gone  outside 
of  the  information  provided  by  the  writings  themselves. 
Letting  the  Bible  be  its  own  interpreter,  we  have  been 
led  to  see  how  the  Law  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah  was  a  far 
less  extensive  work  than  the  Law  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  an 
earher  and  much  smaller  edition,  as  we  might  say,  of  the 
later  code  for  the  Israelitish  people.  This  briefer  Law 
then,  as  Josiah  put  it  in  force,  was  the  Old  Testament, 
the  accepted  sacred  writings,  as  early  as  the  last  quarter 
of  the  seventh  century  B.C.  It  is  fitting,  therefore,  that 
we  should  now  seek  the  course  of  events  through  which 
the  Law  as  used  by  Jeremiah  developed,  during  the 
course  of  two  centuries,  into  the  Law  as  presented  to 
the  nation  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Our  task,  not  easy 
perhaps,  is  to  discover  as  many  as  we  can  of  the  lesser 
streams  of  legal  and  didactic  thought  which  flowed  into 
a  single  stream  between  620  and  450  B.C.  It  is  a  search 
for  sources  of  the  Law  as  those  sources  may  be  dis- 
cernible in  the  Law  itself. 


CHAPTER  VI 

SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW 

From  our  study  thus  far  we  see  that  one  of  the  sources 
of  the  Law  in  the  time  of  Ezra  was  the  earlier  Law  of  the 
time  of  Jeremiah.  We  should  be  very  glad  if  we  could 
know  just  what  that  earlier  Law  was,  how  extensive  it 
was,  and  the  nature  of  its  contents.  Unfortunately 
that  may  be  impossible.  The  Law  which  was  found  in 
the  Temple  apparently  has  not  been  preserved  in  the 
form  it  then  had,  and  there  may  be  no  way  by  which 
it  can  be  reconstructed  with  certainty. 

There  is,  however,  a  practical  course  for  us  to  follow. 
We  may  first  examine  the  contents  of  the  Book  of 
Deuteronomy  and  learn  what  it  offers  concerning  its 
origin.  This  may  furnish  some  clue  to  the  extent  and 
nature  of  the  earlier  Law.  At  any  rate,  such  a  step  is 
the  proper  one  to  be  taken. 

Turning  then  to  our  Book  of  Deuteronomy  we  find 
promising  suggestions  in  the  direction  we  desire  to  go. 
In  31:9  it  is  recorded  that  "Moses  wrote  this  law," 
evidently  referring  not  to  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy 
itself  but  to  the  earlier  Law  which  the  compiler  of 
Deuteronomy  was  using.  In  3 1 :  24  there  is  a  further 
reference  to  the  legislation  which  Moses  had  prepared; 
the  compiler  tells  of  the  time  "when  Moses  had  made  an 
end  of  writing  the  words  of  this  law  in  a  book,"  that  is, 
the  Law  which  the  author  of  Deuteronomy  possessed 

46 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  47 

as  a  basis  of  the  new  edition  of  Israelitish  Law  which  he 
was  preparing. 

In  this  same  suggestive  thirty-first  chapter,  at  the 
twenty-second  verse,  there  is  preserved  another  impor- 
tant statement  concerning  the  sources  of  the  book, 
particularly  as  those  sources  were  inherited  from  Moses. 
Here  the  compiler  introduces  the  words,  "So  Moses 
wrote  this  song  the  same  day  and  taught  it  to  the 
children  of  Israel,"  apparently  referring  to  the  relatively 
long  poem  quoted  in  the  thirty-second  chapter,  in  the 
introduction  to  which  (3 1 :  30)  we  are  told  again  that 
"Moses  spake  in  the  ears  of  all  the  assembly  of  Israel 
the  words  of  this  song,  until  they  were  finished." 

These  statements  in  the  thirty-first  chapter  are 
among  the  most  significant  ones  in  the  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy bearing  on  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  contents. 
They  are  not  extended,  nor  are  they  very  definite. 
They  are  sufficient,  however,  to  show  that  the  author 
of  the  book  in  its  present  form  freely  used  material  which 
he  attributed  to  Moses.  Apparently  Moses  was  thought 
of  as  the  one  who  had  originally  prepared  the  Israelitish 
legislation  which  lies  at  the  basis  of  the  fuller  code  of 
legislation  comprised  in  Deuteronomy. 

It  is  well  worth  while  to  pause  and  consider  another 
item  of  information  arising  from  the  language  quoted 
above.  This  item  is  the  statement  that  Moses  wrote 
poetry,  some  of  which  appears  to  be  preserved.  Moses 
then  was  a  poet  as  well  as  a  lawgiver.  This  is  hardly  a 
common  thought  in  our  time.  The  ordinary  reader  of 
the  Bible,  even  a  reader  who  has  given  considerable  study 
to  the  contents  of  the  volume,  probably  does  not  often, 
if  ever,  think  of  Moses  as  a  poet.    Here  is  an  element 


48  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  the  great  Israelitish  leader  then  which  has  been  over- 
looked, and  yet  it  is  one  which  is  likely  to  be  highly 
important. 

This  importance  Hes  in  the  close  relationship  between 
poetry  and  life  as  a  whole,  especially  in  the  earlier  days. 
From  those  early  times  Moses  was  led  to  make  his 
supreme  contribution  to  the  Hfe  of  man.  We  need  not 
wonder  then  if  he  was  moved  to  use  the  rhythm  of  poetic 
phrase  or  the  emphasis  of  poetic  couplet  as  a  means  of 
bringing  more  adequately  to  the  people  the  rules  which 
were  to  guide  the  path  of  life;  and  as  we  pay  him  this 
new  tribute  we  rightly  enlarge  our  view  of  his  greatness; 
the  splendid  mental  portrait  we  already  possessed  takes 
on  new  lines  of  charm  and  power. 

Such  are  some  of  the  impressions  which  result  from  a 
sympathetic  reading  of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  itself 
with  the  desire  of  learning  what  it  can  furnish  relative 
to  its  authorship.  These  impressions,  however,  are 
only  the  beginning  of  those  which  await  us,  and  we 
gladly  pass  on  to  notice  others. 

One  of  these  is  received  through  thoughtful  observa- 
tion of  the  form  of  language  as  a  whole.  This  observa- 
tion reveals  that  much  of  the  account  is  written  in  the 
third  person,  quite  in  accord  with  what  we  should  expect 
after  considering  the  definite  statements  above  showing 
how  the  author  of  the  book  in  its  present  form  gathered 
material  from  earlier  Mosaic  sources.  Two  or  three 
examples  of  the  language  which  are  a  witness  to  this  fact 
are  in  place.  In  the  opening  verse  of  the  book  we  read: 
"These  are  the  words  which  Moses  spake  unto  all  Israel 
beyond  the  Jordan  in  the  wilderness,  in  the  Arabah. 
.  .  .  ."     And    then    follows    an    explanation    by    the 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  49 

compiler,  so  that  the  reader  of  his  day  may  understand 
the  conditions  out  of  which  Moses  spoke.  As  soon  as 
this  explanation  is  furnished,  we  read  again  (vs.  3): 
"And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  fortieth  year,  in  the  eleventh 
month,  on  the  first  day  of  the  month,  that  Moses  spake 
unto  the  children  of  Israel,  according  to  all  that  Jehovah 

had  given  him  in  commandment  unto  them " 

Thus  the  compiler  is  careful  to  impress  upon  his  readers 
how  he  is  introducing  the  great  lawgiver  whose  teaching 
is  about  to  be  stated  in  the  direct  language  of  Moses 
himself.  If  in  previous  reading  of  the  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy we  have  not  observed  how  the  language  shows 
that  Moses  did  not  write  it  in  its  present  form,  that  is 
because  we  have  read  the  language  for  other  purposes 
than  to  discover  what  it  freely  offers  concerning  its  own 
origin. 

This  distinction  which  the  compiler  makes  between 
his  own  work  and  the  material  which  he  attributed  to 
Moses  appears  strongly  in  the  phrase  "beyond  the 
Jordan,"  which  occurs  at  various  times  in  the  Book  of 
Deuteronomy  as  a  whole.  When  the  author  of  Deuter- 
onomy uses  this  phrase  for  himself,  indicating  the 
geographic  point  from  which  he  wrote,  for  example  in 
1:1,  5;  4:41,  "beyond  the  Jordan"  is  east  of  the  river 
"in  the  land  of  Moab,"  the  writer  thus  indicating  that 
he  lived  and  wrote  after  the  people  had  crossed  the 
Jordan.  When,  however,  the  phrase  "beyond  the  Jor- 
dan" is  clearly  a  part  of  language  attributed  to  Moses, 
it  points  to  localities  on  the  west  side  of  the  Jordan. 
We  see  this  in  such  instances  as  the  words  of  3:25, 
"Let  me  go  over,  I  pray  thee,  and  see  the  good  land  that 
is    beyond    the   Jordan,    that   goodly   mountain,    and 


50  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Lebanon";  or,  in  11:30,  where  Moses  urged  the  people 
to  look  forward  to  Gerizim  and  Ebal,  adding,  "Are  they 
not  beyond  the  Jordan,  behind  the  way  of  the  going  down 
of  the  sun  .  .  .  .?"  The  writer  thus  keeps  clearly 
before  his  readers  how  Moses  did  not  cross  the  river, 
while  the  writer  himself,  at  a  later  date,  was  living  on  the 
western  side  of  the  famous  stream. 

The  details  we  have  thus  noted  are  sufficient  to 
impress  upon  us  how  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  hke  the 
Law  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  was  a  compilation  from  previous 
legislation,  particularly  legislation  attributed  to  Moses. 
As  we  feel  this,  it  is  in  place  to  recall  what  we  gathered 
in  the  preceding  chapter,  where  we  found  how  the  Law 
in  the  time  of  Josiah  was  a  considerable  portion  at  least 
of  our  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  Two  results  stand  out 
before  us:  we  see  that  the  Law  in  the  time  of  Josiah 
is  represented  in  our  Book  of  Deuteronomy;  we  see 
no  less  surely  that  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  is  a 
compilation. 

The  next  inquiry  naturally  is  whether  the  Law  in  the 
time  of  Josiah  was  our  Book  of  Deuteronomy  as  a  whole, 
or  whether  it  was  the  important  source  used  by  the 
compiler  of  Deuteronomy.  As  far  as  we  have  examined 
the  material,  our  answer  would  be  that  the  Law  in  the 
time  of  Josiah  may  have  been  either  Deuteronomy  or  its 
main  source.  So  we  look  farther  to  discover  what  we 
can  bearing  upon  the  question. 

The  step  we  take  is  not  an  easy  one.  Perhaps  the 
Book  of  Deuteronomy  alone  furnishes  nothing  which 
allows  a  decisive  reply  to  our  inquiry.  Its  contents,  as 
we  have  seen,  correspond  to  the  contents  of  the  book 
which   Shaphan  took  to  the  king  and  Jeremiah  later 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  51 

employed  as  the  basis  of  his  stirring  messages  to  the 
people.  Its  extent  is  such  that  it  might  have  been  read 
as  Josiah  and  those  about  him  pored  through  the  pages 
of  the  startling  document  which  was  brought  to  their 
attention  by  the  temple  keepers.  It  is  needful  accord- 
ingly to  look  farther  than  the  book  itself. 

We  turn  first  perhaps  to  the  beginning  of  the  book  and 
examine  to  see  whether  it  appears  to  be  the  beginning  of 
an  independent  work,  or  whether  there  are  indications 
that  it  is  connected  with  the  Book  of  Numbers,  and  so, 
as  it  now  stands,  gives  evidence  of  being  only  a  portion 
of  the  continuous  narrative  which  we  call  the  Pentateuch. 
In  this  examination  it  will  be  best  to  turn  to  the  Bible 
and  read  continuously  from  some  portion  of  the  last 
chapter  of  Numbers  on  over  into  the  first  chapter  of 
Deuteronomy.  Somewhat  adequate  impression  may  be 
gained,  however,  from  a  quotation  of  the  last  verse  of 
Numbers  followed  by  the  opening  words  of  Deuter- 
onomy.    Here  are  these  passages : 

Num.  36: 15  Followed  by  Deut.  i  :  i 

These  are  the  commandments  and  the  ordinances  which 
Jehovah  commanded  by  Moses  unto  the  children  of  Israel  in  the 
plains  of  Moab  by  the  Jordan  at  Jericho. 

These  are  the  words  which  Moses  spake  unto  all  Israel  beyond 
the  Jordan  in  the  wilderness,  in  the  Arabah  over  against  Suph, 
between  Paran,  and  Tophel,  and  Laban,  and  Hazeroth,  and 
Di-Zahab. 

What  is  the  impression  received  from  the  reading? 
Are  these  adjoining  sentences  of  a  single  narrative,  or  are 
they  two  expressions  of  two  similar  ideas  ?  Is  the  first 
a  summary  of  the  account  which  it  closes,  the  second  a 


52  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

forecast  of  the  history  which  it  serves  to  introduce? 
Probably  most  readers  will  incHne  to  the  second  alterna- 
tive, feeling  that  we  are  in  the  presence  of  the  ending 
of  one  work  and  the  beginning  of  another.  This  impres- 
sion is  likely  to  be  strengthened  if  one  turns  to  the  close 
of  Leviticus,  following  it  with  the  opening  of  Numbers, 
and  then  in  like  manner  to  Exodus-Leviticus  and  to 
Genesis-Exodus.  He  will  find  at  the  close  of  Leviticus, 
to  be  sure,  a  summary,  but  it  is  not  followed  by  one  in 
the  first  verse  of  Numbers,  and  it  may  have  been  merely 
a  summary  in  the  midst  of  a  narrative.  The  divisions 
between  Genesis  and  Exodus  and  between  Exodus  and 
Leviticus  seem  quite  arbitrary,  breaking  up  the  con- 
tinuity of  the  account  in  Genesis,  Exodus,  and  Leviticus 
as  a  whole.  Altogether  the  relation  between  Numbers 
and  Deuteronomy,  when  compared  with  the  relations 
between  the  other  books,  suggests  that  Deuteronomy 
is  a  separate  compilation. 

Before  we  adopt  that  as  a  conclusion,  however,  we 
shall  do  well  to  turn  to  the  close  of  the  book  and  notice 
how  it  is  related  to  the  Book  of  Joshua.  On  doing  this 
we  find  that  the  concluding  portion  of  Deuteronomy  is 
an  account  of  the  death  of  Moses.  We  go  on  to  the 
opening  verses  of  Joshua  and  read,  ''Now  it  came  to 
pass  after  the  death  of  Moses  the  servant  of  Jehovah, 
that  Jehovah  spake  unto  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun,  Moses' 

minister "     Thus  the  Joshua  narrative  appears 

to  continue  that  in  Deuteronomy  If  one  opens  the 
Bible  and  reads  the  passages  in  full,  he  will  recognize  how 
fittingly  the  two  books  join  together.  Apparently  the 
books  are  a  single  work  which  has  been  arbitrarily 
divided  at  this  point. 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  S3 

This  discovery  may  well  prompt  us  to  turn  the  pages 
of  the  Bible  further  and  examine  the  relation  between  the 
Book  of  Joshua  and  the  Book  of  Judges.  Is  the  Book 
of  Judges  a  continuation  of  the  account  in  Joshua  ? 

With  that  question  in  mind  we  look  to  the  close  of 
Joshua  and  find  that  24 :  29-30  is  an  account  of  the  death 
of  Joshua.  This  is  separated  from  the  Book  of  Judges 
by  only  three  or  four  sentences,  and  the  two  books  might 
be  severed  portions  of  one  historical  work,  so  far  as  that 
evidence  is  concerned,  since  the  first  verse  of  Judges 
refers  to  what  occurred  after  the  death  of  Joshua.  If, 
however,  one  reads  on  through  the  first  and  second 
chapters  of  the  Book  of  Judges,  he  discovers  quite 
surprising  material.  In  addition  to  noticing  that  the 
first  chapter  as  a  whole  deals  with  conditions  at  the  very 
beginning  of  the  occupation  of  the  country  west  of  the 
Jordan,  he  finds  that  in  chapter  2  Joshua  is  still  alive, 
and  the  account  treats  him  as  though  there  had  been  no 
reference  to  his  death.  Some  meditation  on  these  ele- 
ments of  the  history  reveals  that  in  the  early  portion 
of  the  Book  of  Judges  we  have  an  account  substantially 
parallel  to  that  in  Joshua.  The  two  books  are  not 
different  chapters  of  a  single  history;  they  are  different 
histories  of  the  same  events,  and  the  opening  sentence  of 
the  Book  of  Judges  is  an  editorial  adjustment  made  when 
the  two  histories  were  brought  together  for  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  Prophets  as  the  second  portion  of  the 
IsraeHtish  Scriptures. 

If  now  we  turn  back  and  read  through  Deuteronomy 

and  Joshua  as  a  whole,  it  will  be  easy  to  see  that  the  story 

f  Joshua  is  needed  to  continue  the  history  begun  in 

Deuteronomy.     If  the  style  of  the  narrative  is  observed, 


54  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

as  well  as  the  events  narrated,  one  will  see  also  that 
the  literary  quahties  of  Deuteronomy  are  manifest  in 
Joshua,  even  in  the  Enghsh  translation.  Deuteronomy 
and  Joshua  then  furnish  good  evidence  that  they  are 
dissevered  sections  of  a  single  historical  work. 

Is  it  possible  then  that  the  Law  which  was  found  in 
the  Temple  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  King  Josiah  was 
Deuteronomy- Joshua  as  a  single  book?  Apparently 
this  cannot  be.  In  addition  to  the  fact  that  the  two 
books  together  are  much  longer,  it  seems,  than  what  was 
read  by  Shaphan  and  by  the  king,  there  is  nothing  in  the 
account  of  the  reformation  under  Josiah  to  indicate  that 
the  Book  of  Joshua  was  a  part  of  the  temple  Law. 

There  is  another  possibility.  We  recall,  as  explained 
above  (chap,  v),  how  the  Law  which  was  discovered  in 
the  Temple  may  have  been  merely  one  of  the  main 
sources  of  the  present  Book  of  Deuteronomy.  Since  that 
temple  Law  was  not  Deuteronomy- Joshua  as  a  whole, 
and  it  is  clear  that  Deuteronomy  and  Joshua  in  their 
present  form  belong  together,  we  are  now  brought  easily 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  temple  Law  was  merely  the 
chief  source  out  of  which  our  Deuteronomy  was  compiled. 

What  then  is  the  relation  between  Genesis-Exodus- 
Leviticus-Numbers  as  a  single  continuous  narrative  and 
Deuteronomy-Joshua  as  another  single  continuous 
narrative?  Are  these  really  separate,  independent 
works,  as  the  close  of  Numbers  and  the  opening  words  of 
Deuteronomy  have  led  us  to  think  possible,  if  not 
probable?  Or  is  that  apparent  independence  a  mere 
literary  accident,  Deuteronomy  being  actually  a. con- 
tinuation of  the  story  in  Numbers  ?  Undoubtedly  this 
latter  alternative  is  really  in  accord  with  the  facts  in 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  55 

spite  of  the  language  at  the  point  of  union.  The  contents 
of  the  two  books  as  a  whole  indicate  that  the  second 
continues,  in  a  general  way  at  least,  the  narrative  which 
is  contained  in  the  first.  One  might  even  be  judged 
harshly  for  proposing  that  Deuteronomy  is  not  a  con- 
tinuation of  Numbers,  if  the  proposal  had  not  been  made 
merely  as  a  fair  analysis  of  the  material  bearing  on  the 
question,  particularly  the  language  where  the  two  books 
touch  each  other.  How  there  came  to  be  a  summary 
at  the  end  of  what  we  call  the  Book  of  Numbers  and 
another  introducing  what  we  call  the  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy it  is  not  easy  to  tell.  Perhaps  the  most  probable 
explanation  is  to  recall  how,  in  the  early  use  of  the 
narrative,  convenience  led  to  the  breaking  up  of  it  into 
parts,  and  then  to  recognize  how  the  material  in  Deuter- 
onomy especially  is  of  a  somewhat  distinct  character,  a 
new  summary  of  the  earliest  legislation,  and  an  editorial 
title  such  as  we  now  find  at  the  beginning  of  the  book 
was  a  natural  aid  to  the  reader.  At  the  same  time  a 
summary  of  the  preceding  division,  what  we  call  the 
Book  of  Numbers,  would  have  been  equally  natural. 

There  is  a  significant  outcome  of  our  investigations 
thus  far.  While  we  may  still  speak  of  the  Pentateuch, 
that  is,  a  single  work  in  five  parts,  because  the  word  has 
a  specific  meaning,  we  are  more  concerned,  from  the 
point  of  view  of  literary  history,  with  the  first  six  books 
of  the  Bible,  the  Hexateuch,  as  the  word  is  used  to 
describe  the  early  Bible  narrative,  a  single  work  in  six 
parts. 

Our  study  of  the  testimony  of  the  books  themselves 
then  brings  us  face  to  face  with  a  larger  problem  than 
we  have  been  aware  of  heretofore.    It  is  not  the  problem 


56  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  the  origin  of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  alone;  it  is 
not  even  the  question  of  the  origin  of  the  Law,  the 
Pentateuch;  it  is  the  question  of  the  origin  of  the 
Hexateuch  as  a  whole  with  which  we  are  deahng. 

This  new  aspect  of  the  study  furnishes  a  happy 
feature.  In  discovering  that  our  search  for  the  sources 
of  the  Law  is  really  a  search  for  the  sources  of  the  Hexa- 
teuch, we  are  carried  along  to  see  the  close  relation 
between  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  and  to  the  evident 
relationship  between  the  sources  of  the  two,  for  the  Book 
of  Joshua  belongs  to  both.  We  need  at  once  then  to 
recall  some  of  the  material  we  gathered  in  chapter  iv, 
where  we  have  taken  into  account  sources  of  the  Book 
of  Joshua  as  one  of  the  Prophets,  since  what  was  there  a 
source  for  the  Prophets  becomes  here  relevant  as  a  source 
of  the  Hexateuch  and  of  the  Law  as  a  part  of  the  Hexa- 
teuch. 

The  recollection  of  one  element  of  that  discussion  is 
the  most  significant.  This  element  is  the  study  of  the 
quotations  from  the  Book  of  Jashar  (pp.  23-27),  which 
brought  us  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Book  of  Joshua 
was  composed  at  least  as  late  as  the  close  of  the  life  of 
David.  The  meaning  of  that  is  now  evident  for  the 
further  study  of  the  Hexateuch  and  its  sources.  Joshua 
we  have  found  to  be  at  least  as  late  as  the  days  of 
Solomon,  and  at  the  same  time  it  reveals  itself  as  part 
of  the  continuous  history  beginning  with  the  Book  of 
Genesis.  The  Hexateuch  then,  and  so  the  Law,  assumed 
its  final  form  not  earlier  than  the  death  of  David. 

While  this  is  highly  interesting  as  we  look  for  the 
sources  of  the  Law,  it  ought  not  to  take  us  away  from  the 
consideration  of  further  sources  as  revealed  through 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  57 

investigation  of  the  material  furnished  by  the  Law  itself. 
We  turn  then  to  notice  some  passages  in  the  Law  which 
give  a  further  clue  to  the  early  documents  which  its 
compilers  employed.  Happily  we  have  definite  mention 
of  a  work  which  suggests  that  it  was  akin  to  the  Book  of 
Jashar.  This  is  in  the  Book  of  Numbers  (21 :  14),  where 
we  read: 

Wherefore  it  is  said  in  the  book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah, 

Vaheb  in  Suphah, 

And  the  valleys  of  the  Arnon, 

And  the  slope  of  the  valleys 

That  inclineth  toward  the  dwellings  of  Ar, 

And  leaneth  upon  the  border  of  Moab. 

If  the  title  of  the  work  here  referred  to  were  not  given 
as  the  Wars  of  Jehovah,  we  might  easily  infer  that  this 
quotation,  like  those  in  the  Prophets,  had  been  selected 
from  the  Book  of  Jashar.  Like  those  it  is  poetic,  and 
it  indicates  conditions  connected  with  the  rugged  life 
of  the  Israelitish  nation. 

Two  verses  farther  along  (Num.  21:17-18)  we  meet 
another  quotation  from  a  poetic  source,  introduced  as  a 
song  of  Israel  when  they  had  been  furnished  with  water 
to  meet  their  need.  Whether  this  is  another  quotation 
from  the  book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah  it  is  impossible  to 
say,  but  there  is  no  hint  that  one  source  is  employed  in 
both  instances,  and  perhaps  the  probability  is  that  the 
two  poetic  selections  are  from  separate  writings. 

We  have  only  to  turn  a  leaf,  or  less,  and  find  in 
21:27-30  a  considerable  selection  from  a  poem  which  is 
attributed  to  those  "that  speak  in  proverbs."  Appar- 
ently this  is  still  another  source,  though  the  variation  in 


58  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

name  may  be  only  a  recognition  of  difference  in  title  of 
the  particular  poem  rather  than  the  use  of  an  additional 
collection,  or  book,  of  poetic  compositions.  Whatever 
the  facts  of  authorship  in  detail,  we  are  manifestly  in 
the  presence  of  a  variety  of  sources  which  have  been 
utilized  by  the  compiler  of  the  Law. 

Before  we  leave  this  aspect  of  the  question  of  source 
material  for  the  Law  we  should  think  of  the  extended 
poem  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  Exodus,  which  is  called 
the  song  of  "Moses  and  the  children  of  Israel."  This 
description  may  not  be  intended  to  indicate  authorship. 
It  must,  however,  be  at  least  another  reminder  of  the 
Israelitish  conception  of  Moses  as  a  man  with  poetic 
temperament  at  the  same  time  that  he  was  the  founder  of 
the  national  legislation.  In  this  fact  is  re-emphasized 
the  primitive  relation  between  poetry  and  the  rules 
for  directing  conduct.  This  relationship  may  well  be 
kept  in  mind  in  our  further  effort  to  retrace  the 
currents  of  literary  composition  among  the  Israelitish 
people. 

There  are  two  other  interesting  statements  in  the 
Pentateuch  concerning  the  part  which  Moses  shared  in 
preparing  the  way  for  the  writings  to  which  his  name  has 
become  attached.  One  of  these  is  preserved  in  the  Book 
of  Numbers.  In  33 : 2  it  is  recorded  that  "  Moses  wrote  " 
an  account  of  the  departure  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt 
according  to  the  command  of  Jehovah.  Such  an  account 
would  naturally  be  something  in  the  form  of  annals  of 
the  journeys  which  the  people  made.  Much  of  the 
remainder  of  chapter  33  is  composed  of  brief  descriptions 
of  journeys  which  the  people  accomplished,  and  thus 
fulfils  our  expectations.    We  have  before  us  in   the 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  59 

chapter,  therefore,  some  portion  of  a  brief  and  early 
record  of  the  travels  of  the  people,  a  record  which  entered 
naturally  as  a  source  into  the  later  compilation. 

Two  obvious  inferences  are  to  be  kept  in  mind  from 
what  we  have  just  noted.  We  must  be  impressed  with 
the  fact  that  the  Book  of  Numbers  at  this  point  is  a 
narrative  some  of  the  material  of  which  is  specifically 
credited  to  Moses.  Along  with  that  it  is  equally  clear 
that  the  language  at  the  opening  of  this  thirty-third 
chapter  of  Numbers  is  from  an  editor  who  is  introducing 
Moses  as  the  author  of  the  source  from  which  the  editor 
has  chosen  to  select. 

The  other  statement  concerning  Moses  as  an  author 
is  found  in  Exod.  24:4,  where  we  read  that  "Moses 
wrote  all  the  words  of  Jehovah"  which  had  been  given  to 
him  on  the  occasion  mentioned.  While  the  nature  of 
what  is  attributed  to  Moses  here  is  entirely  different  from 
that  attributed  to  him  in  the  thirty-third  chapter  of 
Numbers,  the  literary  form  of  the  two  passages  is  sub- 
stantially the  same,  and  the  resulting  inferences  are  quite 
alike.  Both  call  attention  to  Moses  as  an  author  of 
material  incorporated  in  our  Pentateuch;  both  make 
clear  the  work  of  an  editor  upon  the  material  which  he 
had  drawn  from  Moses  as  a  source. 

We  are  now  ready  to  observe  that  the  narrative  of 
the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole  is  ordinarily  in  the  third 
person.  This  may  be  verified  on  almost  any  page  of 
any  one  of  the  five  books.  It  appears  to  be  a  significant 
fact.  While  it  is  entirely  conceivable  that  a  writer 
would  use  his  own  name  in  the  third  person,  as  though 
someone  else  were  presenting  him,  that  possibility  seems 
altogether  improbable  both  from  the  general  form  of  the 


6o 


HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 


language  as  we  have  observed  it  and  from  other  con- 
siderations which  will  offer  themselves  later. 

Among  these  considerations  are  the  facts  presented 
in  passages  such  as  the  following,  each  of  which  must  be 
allowed  to  have  its  own  proper  weight  in  leading  to  a 
conclusion  concerning  the  literary  development  of  the 
Pentateuchal  writings.  The  first  of  the  passages  which 
I  mention  has  to  do  with  the  naming  of  Isaac.  This 
naming  itself  is  one  of  the  well-known  incidents  of  the 
Bible  and  is  often  retold.  That  there  are  three  different 
forms  of  the  incident  is  not  so  well  understood.  The 
passages  containing  these  three  versions  of  the  giving 
of  the  name  are  Gen.  17:17,  19;  18:12;  and  21:5-6,  and 
their  significance  may  best  be  seen  by  placing  them  in 
parallel  columns. 


Gen.  18:12 

And  Sarah  laughed  with- 
in herself,  saying,  After  I 
am  waxed  old  shall  I  have 
pleasure,  my  lord  being  old 
also? 


Gen.  21:5-6 

And  Abraham  was  a 
hundred  years  old,  when 
his  son  Isaac  ["laughter"] 
was  born  unto  hira.  And 
Sarah  said,  God  hath  made 
me  to  laugh;  everyone  that 
heareth  will  laugh  with  me. 


Gen.  17:17,  19 

Then  Abraham  fell  upon 
his  face,  and  laughed,  and 
said  in  his  heart,  Shall  a 
child  be  born  unto  him  that 
is  a  hundred  years  old  ?  and 
shall  Sarah,  that  is  ninety 
years  old,  bear?  .... 
Sarah  thy  wife  shall  bear 
thee  a  son;  and  thou  sbalt 
call  his  name  Isaac 
["laughter"]. 


The  three  passages  should  be  read  in  full  if  one  is  to 
receive  the  proper  impression,  but  in  any  comparison  the 
variations  in  the  accounts  of  the  naming  of  the  child 
are  evident.  In  the  first  the  name  Isaac,  meaning 
"laughter,"  is  given  because  of  the  unbelieving  laugh 
of  Abraham.  In  the  second  it  is  Sarah  who  is  lacking 
in  faith  concerning  the  birth  of  the  child  Isaac.  In  the 
third  the  laughter  on  the  part  of  Sarah  which  explains 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  6i 

the  name  of  the  child  is  not  the  laugh  of  unbelief  but 
that  of  joy. 

As  soon  as  these  patent  facts  are  before  us  and  we 
seek  an  explanation,  the  simple  one  is  to  conclude  that 
three  different  accounts  of  the  birth  and  naming  of 
Isaac  have  been  combined  by  a  compiler  without 
attempting  to  harmonize  them.  For  us,  in  our  desire 
to  understand  the  origin  of  the  Mosaic  writings,  this 
preservation  of  the  variant  accounts  is  highly  fortunate. 
If  the  compiler  had  entirely  re-written  the  story  of  the 
incident  we  should  have  been  deprived  of  the  important 
information  we  now  possess. 

Another  incident  of  somewhat  similar  import  is  the 
story  of  the  explanation  of  the  name  Jehovah.  There  is 
an  explanation  in  Exod.  3:13-15;  in  Exod.  6:2-6  an 
explanation  of  the  name  is  given  as  though  nothing  of 
the  sort  had  preceded ;  and  the  second  explanation  varies 
from  the  other.  These  dissimilarities  may  be  seen  best 
by  placing  the  two  passages  side  by  side. 

Exod.  3: 13-14  Exod.  6: 2-6 

And    Moses    said    unto    God,  And    God    spake    unto    Moses 

Behold,   when   I   come   unto   the  and  said  unto  him,  I  am  Jehovah: 

children  of  Israel,  and  shall  say  and   I   appeared   unto   Abraham, 

unto    them,    The    God    of    your  unto  Isaac,  and  unto  Jacob,  as  God 

fathers  hath  sent  me  unto  you;  Almighty:      but     by    my    name 

and  they  shall  say  unto  me.  What  Jehovah  I  was  not  known  to  them, 

is  his  name  ?  what  shall  I  say  unto  ....  And  moreover  I  have  heard 

them?        And    God    said    unto  the  groaning   of  the   children  of 

Moses,  I  AM  THAT  I  AM:   and  Israel  ....  and  I  have  remem- 

he  said.  Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  bered    my   covenant.     Wherefore 

the  children  of  Israel,  I  AM  hath  say  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  I 

sent  me  unto  you.  am  Jehovah 

The  most  casual  reading  of  the  passages  will  disclose 
that  a  single  writer  would  scarcely  have  offered  these 


62  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

two  explanations  of  the  introduction  of  the  name 
Jehovah,  and  particularly  in  such  close  proximity  to  each 
other.  The  ordinary  reader  of  the  Bible,  however, 
naturally  does  not  discover  the  two  accounts,  since  he 
either  does  not  read  the  two  passages  at  a  single  sitting, 
or  he  reads  for  other  than  literary  and  historical  purposes, 
and  the  likeness  of  the  two  does  not  reveal  itself.  That 
there  are  two  accounts,  however,  is  evident;  and  the 
explanation  is  most  easily  found  in  the  recognition  that 
our  Book  of  Exodus  is  a  composite  formed  of  at  least  two 
documents  and  the  editorial  work  of  the  compiler. 

A  further  example  of  the  fusing  of  two  accounts  of  a 
single  incident  is  the  story  of  the  departure  of  Jacob 
from  the  home  of  his  parents  to  spend  some  time  with 
his  uncle  Laban.  The  most  significant  portions  of  the 
combined  accounts  are  Gen.  27:42-45  and  Gen.  28:1-7, 
which  I  leave  to  the  reader  to  arrange  in  their  proper 
parallelism.  He  will  be  particularly  impressed  with  the 
two  quite  different  reasons  assigned  for  the  making  of 
the  journey. 

One  more  instance  of  the  Pentateuchal  parallels, 
selected  from  the  opening  part  of  the  narrative,  will  be 
sufficient  to  illustrate  the  editorial  method  of  composition 
which  the  Mosaic  legislation  displays.  It  is  the  account 
of  the  creation  of  vegetation  and  man  as  given  in  Gen. 
1 :  11-12,  26-27,  ^^d  again  in  2 : 5-7.  The  material  is  so 
important  that  the  full  quotation  is  more  than  justified. 

Gen.  1:11-12,  26-27  Gen.  2:5-7 

And  God  said,  Let  the  earth  put  And  no  plant  of  the  field  was 

forth  grass,  herbs  yielding  seed,  yet  in  the  earth,  and  no  herb  of 

and  fruit-trees  bearing  fruit  after  the  field  had  yet  sprung  up;    for 

their  kind,   wherein  is  the  seed  Jehovah  God  had  not  yet  caused 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  63 

Gen.  1:11-12,  26-27  Gen.  2:5-7 

thereof,  upon  the  earth:  and  it  it  to  rain  upon  the  earth:  and 
was  so.  And  the  earth  brought  there  was  not  a  man  to  till  the 
forth  grass,  herbs  yielding  seed  ground;  but  there  went  up  a  mist 
after  their  kind:  and  God  saw  from  the  earth,  and  watered  the 
that  it  was  good.  whole  face  of  the  ground. 

And  God  said.  Let  us  make  man         And  Jehovah  God  formed  man 
in  our  image,  after  our  likeness:     of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and 
and  let  them  have  dominion  over     breathed    into    his    nostrils    the 
the  fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the     breath  of  life;  and  man  became  a 
birds  of  the  heavens,  and  over  the     living  soul, 
cattle,  and  over  all  the  earth,  and 
over   every   creeping    thing   that 
creepeth    upon    the    earth.     And 
God  created  man  in  his  own  image, 
in  the  image  of  man  created  he 
him;   male  and  female  created  he 
them. 

The  duplication  is  obvious.  In  each  there  is  the 
creation  of  varieties  of  vegetable  life,  and  yet  the  second 
account  begins  with  a  specific  statement  that  there  had 
not  yet  been  any  such  creation  of  plant  life  as  the  first 
Account  clearly  describes.  In  the  second  account  we 
find  the  creation  of  man  as  ingenuously  introduced  as 
though  no  reference  to  such  creation  had  previously  been 
made. 

The  conclusion  is  natural  and  simple.  In  the  first 
two  chapters  of  Genesis  we  are  in  the  presence  of  a 
narrative  of  the  creation  resulting  from  the  combination 
of  at  least  two  accounts,  the  compiler  being  more 
interested  to  preserve  both  forms  of  the  report  than  to 
bring  them  into  agreement,  or  to  take  the  time  to  call 
attention  to  the  variations  of  detail  and  the  disagree- 
ments in  the  resulting  narrative  as  a  whole.  This  may 
be  a  method  of  writing  history  to  which  we  are  not 
accustomed,  but  the  outcome  is  certainly  fortunate  for 


64  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

us  as  a  means  of  revealing  the  processes  through  which 
the  Pentateuchal,  or  rather  the  Hexateuchal,  accounts 
have  been  preserved. 

These  examples  of  parallel  narrative,  as  we  have 
noted  them,  interwoven  into  the  Hexateuch  and  edited 
by  the  hand  of  a  compiler,  or  compilers,  are  sufficient 
to  illustrate  the  general  processes  through  which  the 
Mosaic  legislation  arose  and  the  methods  which  were 
employed  in  bringing  the  result  about.  We  need  further, 
at  this  point,  only  to  recall  what  sources,  or  types  of 
sources,  have  revealed  themselves  as  we  have  examined 
the  language  of  the  Law  itself. 

At  the  basis  of  all  the  material  assembled  in  the 
Pentateuch  then  lies  the  inheritance  which  the  nation 
had  received  from  Moses.  He  was  remembered,  by  the 
writers  of  later  days,  as  the  writer  of  annals  of  the 
Israelitish  travels,  as  the  singer  of  heroic  stories  con- 
cerning Israel  and  her  history,  and  as  the  framer  of 
legislation  and  other  rules  for  the  guidance  of  the  people's 
life.  How  extensive  the  writings  of  Moses  were,  in  what 
form  he  left  them,  and  how  recollections  of  his  thought 
and  service  were  compiled  by  others  and  related  to  his 
own  writings,  as  his  friends  would  certainly  have  been 
disposed  to  preserve  his  career  and  explain  its  meaning 
for  those  who  followed — all  this  we  are  not  told.  We  can 
merely  draw  such  inferences  as  detailed  study  of  the 
history  warrants,  and  there  seems  no  occasion  here  to  do 
it  at  all.  Our  purpose  is  merely  to  understand  the 
elements  of  Hexateuchal  growth  and  the  processes  of 
development. 

With  this  Mosaic  basis  for  Israelitish  legislation  the 
compilers  had  access  also  to  other  early  poetic  story  and 


SOURCES  OF  THE  LAW  65 

other  traditions.  As  an  outcome,  somewhere  before 
the  eighteenth  year  of  King  Josiah,  there  was  prepared 
the  Law  which  was  then  found  in  the  Temple.  With 
regard  to  who  the  compiler  or  compilers  were  we  have  no 
information.  How  extensive  the  book  was  we  are  not 
told.  A  study  of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  in  its 
relation  to  the  reformation  of  Josiah,  as  recorded  in  the 
twenty-second  and  twenty-third  chapters  of  II  Kings, 
leads  to  the  conclusion,  as  we  have  seen,  that  the  temple 
Law  must  have  been  a  considerable  portion,  perhaps 
nearly  all,  of  the  contents  of  Deuteronomy. 

Thus  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  largely  as  we  have 
it,  became  the  book  of  legal  guidance  for  the  Israelitish 
people  before  the  year  600  B.C.  Then  came  the  national 
overthrow  and  the  exile,  but  the  national  Law  and  the 
other  writings  were  cherished  and  preserved  and  thus 
became  possible  sources  of  further  writings.  These 
writings,  as  we  have  observed,  included  the  Book  of 
Joshua  as  well  as  the  Law,  resulting  in  a  literary  Hexa- 
teuch  rather  than  the  Pentateuch  alone.  As  Joshua  is 
the  first  of  the  Prophets,  we  have  been  carried  along 
inevitably  to  think  of  the  sources  of  the  Law  as  inti- 
mately related  to  those  of  the  Prophets.  This  opens  the 
larger  question  of  the  growth  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets 
as  a  whole. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  GROWTH  OF  THE  LAW  AND 
THE  PROPHETS 

The  outcome  of  our  study  thus  far  is  a  discovery  that 
the  several  books  called  by  Israel  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets  were  the  result  of  a  long  development  in  which 
the  writings  of  various  authors  and  editors  were  finally 
compiled  into  books,  and  these  books  were  gathered  into 
two  collections,  the  earlier  of  which  was  known  as  the 
Law  and  the  later  as  the  Prophets.  This  outcome  pre- 
sents itself  through  an  examination  of  the  several  books 
themselves,  beginning  with  the  specific  language  of  the 
New  Testament  and  then  following  up  the  suggestions 
and  clues  which  continuously  open  for  our  use. 

This  method  commends  itself  because  it  meets  the 
requirement  of  being  faithful  to  the  Scriptures.  Where 
the  Bible  itself  leads,  all  lovers  of  the  book  will  readily 
follow.  If  the  method  discloses  some  elements  of  the 
literary  development  of  the  Bible  which  are  not  generally 
familiar  or  universally  accepted,  the  outcome  is  not  the 
fault  of  the  method.  As  far  as  the  Bible,  even  the 
English  Version,  is  concerned,  the  elements  of  growth  to 
which  attention  has  been  called  might  have  been 
generally  known  long  ago.  They  have  failed  to  become 
understood  because  most  of  us  have  failed  to  observe 
the  historical  data  which  were  lying  ready  at  hand  and 
waiting  for  proper  use.  And  we  also  are  to  a  large 
degree  blameless  in  the  matter  because  the  training 

66 


GROWTH  OF  THE  LAW  AND  THE  PROPHETS  67 

furnished  us  has  tended  to  obscure  or  hide  the  literary 
history  of  the  Bible.  Our  teachers  and  we  have  usually 
gone  to  the  Bible  as  a  book  of  devotion,  or  a  book  of 
doctrine,  and  we  have  passed  by  on  the  other  side  when 
we  came  near  the  appeal  of  the  book  for  attention  as  a 
source  of  its  own  history. 

Now  that  an  examination  of  the  Scripture  itself 
reveals  its  growth,  we  ought  perhaps  to  summarize  the 
results  already  attained.  We  have  been  traveling  from 
near  the  mouth  of  the  river  of  Scripture  back  toward  the 
various  sources  of  this  wonderful  stream  of  life  and 
thought;  now  it  may  be  useful  to  retrace  our  steps,  note 
briefly  what  we  have  discovered,  and  thus  gather  some- 
thing of  the  actual  literary  movements  out  of  which  arose 
the  Law  and  the  Prophets. 

We  may  begin  then  by  recalling  how  the  earliest 
specific  references  of  the  Bible  to  authorship  are  those 
which  mention  Moses  as  a  writer  of  annals  and  other 
material.  These  references  have  been  considered  in 
some  detail,  apparently  covering  all  specific  indications 
of  his  authorship  which  the  Pentateuch  contains. 
Accordingly,  as  far  as  the  testimony  of  the  Law  itself  is 
concerned,  the  literary  history  of  the  Bible  began  about 
1200  B.C.,  since  the  period  to  which  Moses  belonged  is 
not  far  from  that  date.  Whether  there  was  an  earlier 
literary  development  the  Hexateuch  does  not  show. 
There  may  have  been  such  a  history,  and  fragments  of  its 
literary  expression  may  be  imbedded,  without  descriptive 
marks,  in  the  Hexateuchal  narrative.  Perhaps  it  is 
most  natural  to  assume  such  a  literary  heritage.  If  we 
do,  we  are  likely  to  find  the  remains  of  it  in  such  genea- 
logical lists  as  those  of  the  tenth  and  eleventh  chapters 


68  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  Genesis,  and  in  such  snatches  of  primitive  poetry  as 
Gen.  4:23-24,  where  these  early  couplets  are  preserved. 

And  Lamech  said  unto  his  wives: 
Adah  and  Zillah,  hear  my  voice; 
Ye  wives  of  Lamech,  hearken  unto  my  speech: 
For  I  have  slain  a  man  for  wounding  me. 
And  a  young  man  for  bruising  me: 
If  Cain  shall  be  avenged  sevenfold, 
Truly  Lamech  seventy  and  sevenfold. 

Interesting  as  such  verses  are,  however,  and  bearing 
inherent  marks  of  primitive  thought  and  expression,  we 
are  unable  to  date  them  from  the  material  offered  by  the 
Bible  itself.  We  cannot  even  say  that  they  are  earlier 
than  the  time  of  Moses,  though  we  may  feel  that  they 
are.  As  far  as  the  biblical  testimony  is  concerned,  the 
Scriptures  trace  themselves  back  only  to  Moses,  the 
leader,  the  poet,  and  the  lawgiver  of  the  sons  of  Israel; 
and  to  him  it  attributes  only  portions  of  the  material 
which  was  employed  by  the  later  writers. 

During  the  two  centuries  or  so  between  Moses  and 
David  no  author,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  term,  seems 
to  have  appeared.  The  Scripture  evidence  for  the 
period  is  fragmentary,  but  it  leads  to  that  conclusion. 
There  are,  however,  some  suggestive,  though  incidental, 
references  to  literary  activity. 

In  Josh.  8:32  (cf.  24:26)  it  is  said  that  Joshua  wrote 
a  copy  of  the  Law.  Though  this  does  not  make  the 
successor  of  Moses  an  author,  it  does  indicate  education 
and  the  possibihty  of  literary  life.  This  would  have  been 
natural  for  associates  of  Moses,  particularly  for  his  close 
companion,  who  assumed  his  leadership.  What  the  Law 
was  of  which  Joshua  is  said  to  have  made  a  copy  may 


GROWTH  OF  THE  LAW  AND  THE  PROPHETS  69 

be  inferred  from  what  we  have  already  gathered  con- 
cerning the  work  of  Moses  and  the  Kterary  contribution 
which  he  made  to  the  Israehtish  people.  Obviously  we 
are  not  able  to  say  just  what  was  its  nature  or  its 
extent. 

On  page  27  I  have  already  called  attention  to  the 
language  of  Judg.  1:11-12.  It  has  a  significance  beyond 
what  the  use  of  it  there  properly  brought  out,  a  sig- 
nificance which  is  appropriate  and  important  here. 
This  is  found  in  the  older  name  of  the  place,  Kiriath- 
sepher,  which  means  *'City-of-books."  In  other  words 
the  people  who  lived  there  before  the  Israelites  came 
into  the  country  had  reached  the  stage  of  cultural 
development  where  one  of  their  towns  was  known  as  a 
city  of  books  pre-eminently.  Into  such  an  atmosphere 
the  sons  of  Israel  entered  when  they  passed  to  the  west- 
ward of  the  Jordan  River  and  made  that  part  of  the 
country  their  home.  Any  education,  culture,  and  lit- 
erary tendency  which  they  already  possessed  found  a 
favorable  soil  in  which  to  grow,  and  it  would  have  been 
strange  if  progress  had  not  been  made. 

The  story  of  Deborah  I  have  used  on  page  27  to 
illustrate  the  double  type  of  source  material  in  the 
Prophets.  It  rightly  serves  another  purpose  here. 
While  we  may  not  be  able  to  say  certainly  that  either 
the  prose  or  the  poetic  account  is  contemporary,  or 
nearly  so,  with  the  event,  yet  it  seems  more  natural  to 
think  that  the  poetic  story  at  least  belongs  to  about  the 
period  when  the  incident  occurred.  If  this  is  correct, 
then  this  poem,  and  very  likely  more  or  less  of  other 
similar  literature,  appeared  during  the  half-dozen  genera- 
tions from  Moses  to  David  the  king.    The  heritage  from 


70  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Moses  and  from  the  literary  predecessors  in  Palestine 
had  not  been  lost;  perhaps  it  was  rather  beginning  to 
be  improved. 

Another  incidental  but  suggestive  statement  belong- 
ing to  this  period  occurs  in  I  Sam.  lo:  25,  where  we  read 
that  Samuel  told  the  people  about  the  kingdom  and  wrote 
this  in  a  book.  How  much  may  have  been  written,  or 
the  nature  of  it,  we  can  only  guess,  but  at  any  rate  the 
later  compiler  of  the  Prophets  looked  back  to  Samuel 
as  the  writer  of  an  account  of  the  government  and  its 
meaning  for  the  people  who  had  providentially  come 
under  his  direction.  The  generation  preceding  that  of 
David,  therefore,  as  well  as  that  following  him,  gave 
some  attention  to  recording  the  events  which  seemed  of 
most  concern  for  the  national  welfare. 

Such  are  the  fountains  and  brooklets  of  literary 
thought  and  expression  which  the  Bible  reveals  concern- 
ing the  days  previous  to  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom 
under  the  direction  of  the  son  of  Jesse.  Individually 
they  might  not  seem  to  mean  much  toward  a  national 
literature,  but  taken  together  and  viewed  as  the  early 
sources  of  a  literary  development  they  are  amply  suffi- 
cient as  a  promise  of  all  that  manifested  itself  later. 

When  we  arrive  at  the  period  of  David  and  Solomon 
and  their  successors  the  evidence  of  literary  efforts 
increases.  According  to  II  Sam.  11:14,  David  wrote  a 
letter  to  his  general,  Joab ;  and  from  this  period  on  there 
is  somewhat  frequent  reference  to  the  writing  of  letters 
or  to  other  literary  activity.  It  was  at  this  time,  as 
we  have  already  seen  (p.  25),  that  the  Book  of  Jashar 
appears  to  locate  itself,  and  here  we  find  the  earliest' 
mention  of  the  annalist  and  secretary.     In  connection 


GROWTH  OF  THE  LAW  AND  THE  PROPHETS  71 

with  the  story  of  the  reign  of  Solomon  we  meet  a  refer- 
ence to  the  book  of  the  acts  of  this  king  (I  Kings  11 :4i), 
this  being  the  first  mention  of  such  a  narrative.  After 
the  kingdom  was  divided,  about  935  B.C.,  each  of  the  two 
resulting  kingdoms  began  a  similar  narrative.  For  the 
kingdom  of  Judah  it  is  called  the  Book  of  the  Chronicles 
of  the  Kings  of  Judah,  and  for  the  northern  kingdom  we 
have  the  corresponding  form,  the  Book  of  the  Chronicles 
of  the  Kings  of  Israel. 

Some  inferences  are  obvious.  The  literary  inher- 
itance from  Moses  and  his  successors  did  not  suflEice. 
The  sons  of  Israel  had  reached  a  development  where  they 
desired  the  work  of  the  historian,  the  historian  of  those 
times  to  be  sure,  but  at  any  rate  the  labors  of  a  class  of 
men  whose  business  it  was  to  record  and  preserve  some- 
thing of  the  royal  achievements.  This  was  a  require- 
ment for  the  undivided  nation,  and  it  was  regarded  as 
equally  essential  for  each  of  the  two  branches  into  which 
the  nation  separated. 

The  significance  of  this  for  the  literary  history  of  the 
people  and  the  growth  of  the  Bible  deserves  to  be  well 
considered,  especially  in  its  relation  to  other  data. 
Among  these  other  data  is  the  fact  that  the  Hexateuch 
contains  much  material  in  addition  to  the  legislative 
nucleus  inherited  from  Moses  and  the  poetic  thought 
received  from  him  and  other  singers.  It  contains  an 
outline  of  the  history  of  the  world  from  the  beginning  of 
time,  and  this  outline  history,  as  we  have  observed,  is 
composed  in  various  instances  of  dupHcate  accounts 
woven  together.  At  the  same  time  there  is  no  evidence 
that  these  duplicate  stories  of  the  ancient  days  were 
written  in  the  period  of  the  events.     There  is  no  mention 


72  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  the  date,  or  periods,  when  they  were  written.  The 
earhest  mention  of  literary  hfe  which  would  naturally 
have  produced  such  historical  narratives  begins  with 
David  and  Solomon. 

How  are  we  to  explain  these  various  data  of  literary 
activities  ?  Undoubtedly  they  are  related  to  each  other. 
What  is  the  relation?  The  answer  is  perhaps  almost 
obvious  as  soon  as  we  look  at  the  entire  situation  with 
an  open  mind.  Before  we  state  it,  however,  there  is 
one  other  element  of  the  situation  which  claims  attention 
for  a  moment. 

Two  of  the  prominent  figures  in  the  early  part  of  the 
ninth  century,  that  is  in  the  time  of  Ahab  and  a  little 
later,  were  the  prophets  Elijah  and  Elisha.  The  Books 
of  Kings  contain  a  long  account  of  the  careers  of  these 
men.  Yet  there  is  little  or  nothing  to  indicate  that  they 
wrote  their  messages.  They  belonged  to  the  age  when 
the  oracle  of  the  prophet  was  only  oral.  The  accounts 
of  their  labors  were  preserved  by  others  than  themselves. 
Whether  those  who  wrote  these  messages  and  the  events 
connected  with  the  prophetic  careers  were  friends  of  those 
days  and  wrote  contemporary  records  we  are  not  advised. 
Since  there  were  royal  secretaries,  however,  there  may 
well  have  been  prophetic  secretaries.  Perhaps  there  is  a 
suggestion  of  such  secretary  friends  in  the  story  of  the 
sons  of  the  prophets  as  told  in  II  Kings  2:3-7.  The 
significant  fact  for  the  purposes  of  our  study  now  is 
that  we  have  copious  narratives  of  prophetic  life  and 
thought,  but  narratives  not  prepared  by  the  prophets 
themselves. 

Altogether  we  have  most  important  material  out  of 
which  to  frame  an  answer  to  the  question  suggested  in  the 


GROWTH  OF  THE  LAW  AND  THE  PROPHETS  73 

second  paragraph  above.  We  have  a  legal  inheritance 
from  Moses,  poems  which  he  composed,  the  songs  of 
other  early  bards,  the  beginning  of  royal  annals  in  the 
reign  of  David,  the  continuance  of  such  records  for  both 
of  the  later  kingdoms,  the  law  as  it  appeared  in  the  time 
of  King  Josiah,  and  the  combination  of  all  such  material, 
together  with  an  outline  of  the  history  of  the  world  from 
the  beginning  of  time,  this  outhne  itself  showing  its 
composite  nature,  as  in  the  incidents  of  the  creation  of 
man,  the  story  of  the  flood,  and  the  naming  of  Isaac — 
all  these  elements  combined  as  early  as  the  time  of  Ezra 
into  a  single  narrative  the  chief  part  of  which  we  call  the 
Pentateuch.     How  did  this  come  about  ? 

The  reply,  in  addition  to  what  has  already  been 
indicated,  obviously  is  that,  as  each  of  the  two  kingdoms 
following  the  death  of  Solomon  was  interested  to  record 
its  own  achievements,  so  the  leaders  of  each  became 
desirous  of  carrying  its  history  back  to  the  dawn  of  time, 
made  use  of  such  traditions  and  other  materials  as  were 
available,  and  wrote  a  history  accordingly.  As  the 
materials  were  not  the  same  for  the  writers  of  both 
kingdoms,  so  the  two  histories  varied  in  the  respective 
accounts  of  the  events  described.  The  leaders  of  the 
two  nations,  when  they  were  taken  to  Babylonia,  carried 
these  histories  with  them.  Surrounded  by  the  thought, 
culture,  and  historical  materials  of  Babylonia,  some  of 
them,  particularly  the  priestly  scholars,  were  led  to  take 
still  a  third  view  of  Israelitish  history,  law,  and  life,  and 
yet  to  cherish  the  writings  which  they  had  inherited. 
And  out  of  all  these  elements  arose  the  Hexateuch,  as 
naturally  as  the  full-flowing  river  is  the  gathering 
together  of  many  fountains,  brooklets,  creeks,  and  other 


74  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

larger  streams.  In  some  places  it  exhibits  the  combina- 
tion of  three  sources,  with  the  work  of  an  editor;  in  other 
places  only  two  main  sources. 

The  composition  of  the  Hexateuch,  however,  did  not 
absorb  all  the  available  materials  of  Israehtish  thought, 
history,  and  law.  Indeed  it  made  use  of  material  cover- 
ing only  the  time  previous  to  and  including  the  days  of 
Joshua;  and  the  fact  that  a  faithful  study  of  it  reveals 
its  composite  nature  reveals  also  that  it  was  the  product 
of  selections,  and  that  the  remainders  of  those  selections 
were  discarded  or  left  for  such  later  service  as  might  be 
desired.  In  other  words,  a  proper  study  of  the  language 
of  the  Bible  to  learn  its  history  introduces  us  to  an 
Israelitish  literature  of  considerable  extent,  only  the 
choicest  portions  of  which,  as  so  regarded  by  the  later 
compilers,  have  been  preserved. 

This  becomes  increasingly  evident  as  we  pass  on  later 
than  the  days  of  Ezra  and  the  formation  of  the  Hexateuch 
to  consider  the  formation  of  the  Prophets  into  a  single 
closed  collection  of  sacred  writings.  It  is  to  be  seen  in 
the  fact  that,  while  the  several  books  of  the  Prophets  are 
not  referred  to  in  the  time  of  Ezra  and  evidently  had  not 
yet  been  exalted  to  the  sacred  dignity  bestowed  on  them 
a  little  more  than  two  centuries  later,  yet  the  contents 
of  nearly  or  quite  all  of  these  writings  are  devoted  to  life 
and  events  previous  to  Ezra's  work.  In  the  case  of  the 
earlier  prophets,  namely,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  and 
Kings,  this  is  obvious,  the  last  of  these  having  reached  its 
natural  close  when  the  kingdoms  came  to  an  end.  While 
it  is  not  so  evident  in  the  case  of  the  preacher-prophets 
Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  Micah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the 
others,  it  is  sufficiently  clear  to  require  only  mention  in 


GROWTH  OF  THE  LAW  AND  THE  PROPHETS  75 

order  to  be  recognized.     These  men  lived  before  Ezra's 
time. 

The  course  of  events  which  led  to  the  selection  and 
acceptance  of  these  Prophets  as  the  second  division  of 
the  Israelitish  Scriptures  is  reasonably  certain.  The 
actual  marks  of  the  process,  to  be  sure,  have  not  been 
discovered;  and  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  compilers  were 
not  concerned  in  leaving  a  record  of  what  they  did  and 
how  they  came  to  do  it.  They  were  concerned  with  the 
enterprise  itself,  the  better  preservation  of  their  sacred 
writings,  and  the  use  of  these  in  the  development  of  the 
nation.  The  needful  materials  for  this  work,  the 
assembhng  of  the  Prophets,  were  lying  ready  at  hand,  and 
the  appearance  of  the  collection  about  200  B.C.  leaves 
little  doubt  concerning  the  substance  of  what  occurred. 
It  was  this :  Israelitish  history  as  it  had  been  written  in 
the  kingdom  of  Judah  and  a  similar  history  as  it  had  been 
written  in  the  northern  kingdom,  each  covering  the  time 
from  Moses  to  Solomon,  were  used,  edited,  and  combined 
with  other  available  sources  to  produce  our  Books  of 
Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  and  the  beginning  of  Kings. 
In  a  similar  way  the  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings 
of  Judah  and  the  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of 
Israel,  with  other  sources,  were  brought  together,  the 
result  being  now  before  us  in  the  Books  of  the  Kings,  as 
these  cover  the  period  from  Solomon  to  the  exile.  The 
oracles  of  the  great  preachers  of  Israel,  from  Amos  to 
Malachi,  were  handled  in  a  similar  manner  and  brought 
into  substantially  their  present  form.  Finally,  some- 
where about  two  centuries  before  the  birth  of  Jesus,  all 
these  writings  were  so  used  and  came  to  be  so  regarded 
because  of  their  peculiar  worth  that,   through  divine 


76  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

providence,  they  became  a  distinct  and  specially  recog- 
nized collection  of  sacred  books.  Since  we  do  not  know 
the  details  of  the  extended  process  there  is  no  need  that 
we  should  attempt  to  narrate  them.  It  is  important, 
however,  that  we  keep  in  mind  how  natural  the  growth 
was,  and  that  we  enter  into  sympathy  with  the  spirit, 
historical,  literary,  and  religious,  which  brooded  over 
the  development. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS 

Our  study  thus  far  has  revealed  how  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets  developed.  Beginning  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment we  traced  back  the  various  stages  of  growth  and 
the  sources  which  were  employed  by  the  sacred  writers. 
Having  done  that,  we  retraced  our  steps  (chap,  vii), 
observing  the  natural  development  which  the  Law  and 
the  Prophets  show.  Now  it  is  in  place  to  seek  the 
processes  through  which  the  third  division  of  the  Hebrew 
Bible,  the  Writings,  came  to  be  a  recognized  and  closed 
collection  of  books. 

In  this  search  we  should  recall,  from  chapter  i,  how 
Jesus  and  the  authors  of  the  New  Testament  books  seem 
not  to  have  had  the  Writings  as  a  definite  collection. 
No  one  of  the  New  Testament  speakers  or  writers  refers 
to  it.  In  view  of  this  we  cannot  expect  to  find  in  the 
Bible  any  evidence  of  the  formation  of  the  third  division 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible  as  a  whole.  We  can  only  study  the 
growth  of  the  several  books,  but  there  are  some  items  of 
material  in  such  a  study  which  make  it  particularly 
useful. 

It  has  been  already  noticed  (pp.  8-9)  that  the  Book 
of  Psalms  was  the  portion  of  the  Writings  most  used  in 
New  Testament  times,  and  that  the  Psalms  ordinarily 
have  stood  first  among  the  books  of  the  third  division 
of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  To  the  Psalms  then  we  nat- 
urally give  first  attention  in  the  present  chapter. 

77 


78  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

While  most  readers  of  the  Bible  are  accustomed  to 
think  of  the  Psalms  as  a  single  book,  they  are  really  a 
combination  of  five  books.  The  Authorized  Version 
unfortunately  has  never  revealed  this.  In  the  Revised 
Version,  however,  the  fact  is  easily  seen,  the  divisions 
being  noted  and  a  separate  title  given  for  each  division. 
Thus  the  student  is  advised  that  the  five  books  in  the 
Hebrew  are  arranged  as  follows:  Book  I,  Pss.  1-41; 
Book  II,  Pss.  42-72;  Book  III,  Pss.  73-89;  Book  IV, 
Pss.  90-106;  Book  V,  Pss.  107-150. 

At  once  there  is  a  desire  to  know  how  it  came  about 
that  the  Israelites  regarded  the  Psalms  as  a  book  of  five 
parts,  or,  more  accurately,  why  the  scribes  of  Israel 
preserved  their  marvelous  collection  of  sacred  songs  in 
five  divisions.  We  must  therefore  examine  some  of  the 
data  offered  by  the  Psalms  in  reply  to  the  question 
before  us. 

The  ordinary  reader,  even  though  faithful  in  his  use 
of  the  Bible,  may  not  have  noticed  that  some  of  the 
psalms  are  almost  exact  dupUcates  of  others.  Students 
of  the  history  of  the  Psalms,  however,  have  discovered 
that  such  repetitions  occur,  and  it  will  be  helpful  here  to 
consider  some  of  them.  This  may  best  be  done  by  such 
parallelism  as  I  have  used  in  the  case  of  the  composite 
narrative  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  One  of  the 
striking  instances  is  that  of  Ps.  14  when  compared  with 
Ps.  53- 

Ps.  14  Ps.  53 

The  fool  hath  said  in  his  heart,  The  fool  hath  said  in  his  heart, 

There  is  no  God.  There  is  no  God. 

They  are  corrupt,  they  have  done  Corrupt  are  they,  and  have  done 

abominable  works;  abominable  iniquity; 

There  is  none  that  doeth  good.  There  is  none  that  doeth  good. 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS 


79 


Ps.  14 
Jehovah  looked  down  from  heaven 

upon  the  children  of  men, 
To  see  if  there  were  any  that  did 

understand, 
That  did  seek  after  God. 
They  are  all  gone  aside;   they  are 

together  become  filthy; 
There  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no, 

not  one. 
Have  all  the  workers  of  iniquity 

no  knowledge, 
Who  eat  up  my  people  as  they  eat 

bread, 
And  call  not  upon  the  name  of 

Jehovah  ? 
There  were  they  in  great  fear; 
For  God  is  in  the  generation  of 

the  righteous. 
Ye  put  to  shame  the  counsel  of 

the  poor, 
Because  Jehovah  is  his  refuge. 
Oh   that   the   salvation   of   Israel 

were  come  out  of  Zion! 
When  Jehovah  bringeth  back  the 

captivity  of  his  people, 
Then    shall    Jacob    rejoice,    and 

Israel  shall  be  glad. 


Ps.  S3 
God   looked   down    from   heaven 

upon  the  children  of  men, 
To  see  if  there  were  any  that  did 

understand. 
That  did  seek  after  God. 
Every  one  of  them  is  gone  back; 

they  are  together  become  filthy; 
There  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no, 

not  one. 
Have  all  the  workers  of  iniquity 

no  knowledge. 
Who  eat  up  my  people  as  they  eat 

bread, 
And  call  not  upon  God  ? 
There   were   they  in  great   fear 

where  no  fear  was; 
For  God  hath  scattered  the  bones 

of  him  that  encampeth  against 

thee: 
Thou  hast  put  them  to  shame, 

because  God  hath  rejected  them. 
Oh   that   the   salvation   of  Israel 

were  come  out  of  Zion! 
When    God    bringeth    back    the 

captivity  of  his  people. 
Then    shall    Jacob    rejoice,    and 

Israel  shall  be  glad. 


Two  or  three  points  at  least  need  to  be  noticed  in  the 
comparison.  One  of  these  is  that  the  Fourteenth  Psalm 
is  in  the  first  of  the  five  books  and  the  Fifty-third  in  the 
second  book.  Again,  in  the  Fifty-third  Psalm  the  name 
Jehovah  does  not  appear;  the  title  God  takes  its  place. 
Further,  there  are  some  verbal  differences  in  details, 
especially  in  the  latter  part  of  the  Psalms.  Apparently 
one  of  the  Psalms  is  a  revision  of  the  other.  This  is  the 
simplest  explanation  of  what  one  sees,  and  it  is  an 
entirely  natural  explanation,  the  more  appealing  in  view 


8o  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  what  we  have  observed  concerning  the  editing  which 
occurred  in  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  It  may  be  noted 
in  addition  that  the  title  given  to  the  Fifty-third  Psabn 
is  different  from  that  given  to  the  Fourteenth. 

There  are  two  other  similar  duplications  in  the 
Psalms,  each  of  them  even  more  suggestive  in  some 
respects  than  the  duplication  just  considered.  Psalm 
40:13-17  is  duplicated  in  the  five  verses  of  Ps.  70,  this 
being  another  repetition  of  a  part  of  the  first  of  the  five 
books  as  a  portion  of  the  second  book,  but  differing  from 
the  case  we  have  noticed  in  that  a  part  of  Ps.  40  is  repro- 
duced in  the  second  book  as  an  entire  psalm.  Further 
comparison  of  details  may  be  left  to  the  reader. 

The  third  instance  of  duplication  shows  the  reverse 
process:  Ps.  57:7-11  of  the  second  book  has  been  com- 
bined with  Ps.  60:5-12  of  the  second  book  to  form  Ps. 
108  of  the  fifth  book,  and  the  title  given  to  the  new 
formation  disregards  most  of  the  material  in  the  titles 
of  the  two  from  which  it  was  taken. 

The  reader  probably  has  no  difficulty  in  agreeing  that 
where  these  duplications  occur  the  second  form  is  a 
revision,  or  combination  with  revision,  of  the  other 
psalm  or  psalms.  It  will  readily  be  seen  also  that  the 
five  books  composing  our  single  Book  of  Psalms  are 
undoubtedly  five  separate  collections,  each  very  probably 
belonging  to  its  own  period  of  Israelitish  life  and  finally 
brought  together  into  the  national  hjonnal,  certain 
duplications  being  retained.  In  modern  times  we  have 
an  analogous  development  in  the  several  numbers  of  the 
Gospel  Hymns,  popularly  known  as  the  Moody  and 
Sankey  Hymns,  which  suggests  another  similarity.  Just 
as  these  modern  songs  bear  that  popular  title,  even 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  8i 

though  many  of  them  did  not  come  from  either  Moody 
or  Sankey,  so  the  Book  of  Psahns  is  frequently  called 
the  Psalms  of  David,  though  a  very  superficial  examina- 
tion of  the  titles  of  the  Psalms  shows  that  many  of  them 
are  not  even  ascribed  to  David,  and  a  considerable 
number  are  specifically  ascribed  to  other  Israelitish 
poets.  (In  a  similar  way,  no  doubt,  we  have  come  to 
speak  of  the  Law  of  Moses,  giving  to  the  entire  body  of 
Israelitish  legislation  the  name  which  was  attached  to 
the  first  collection.) 

Thus  the  Book  of  Psalms  in  itself  alone  is  a  striking 
example  of  the  principle  of  growth  which  we  have  found 
exemplified  everywhere  in  the  formation  of  the  Hebrew 
Bible.  When  the  process  began  we  are  unable  to  say. 
That  it  received  a  special  and  enduring  impetus  from  the 
son  of  Jesse  is  indicated  by  the  place  which  the  name  of 
David  has  always  received  in  connection  with  the 
Israelitish  hymns.  How  long  the  process  continued  is 
equally  difficult  to  state  with  certainty.  It  seems  not 
to  have  been  completed  when  the  Prophets  were  set 
apart  some  two  hundred  years  B.C.,  or  the  Psalms  would 
then  have  been  accorded  similar  distinction  and  honor. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  collection,  through  its  use  in  the 
days  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles,  offers  its  own  evidence 
that  it  was  then  established  and  accepted. 

It  will  not  be  amiss,  before  we  pass  from  consideration 
of  the  Book  of  Psalms,  to  note  two  or  three  other  bits  of 
information  which  the  book  provides.  One  of  these  is 
the  language  of  Ps.  72:20,  which  is  not  a  part  of  the 
psalm,  properly  speaking,  but  an  editorial  note  affixed  to 
the  second  of  the  five  books,  or  possibly  intended  as  a 
comment  upon  both  Book  I  and  Book  11.    The  language 


82  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

is:  ''The  prayers  of  David  the  son  of  Jesse  are  ended." 
In  other  words,  the  Davidic  psahns  known  to  the  author 
of  that  note  had  all  been  included  in  the  second,  or  in  the 
first  and  second  together,  of  the  five  Books  of  Psalms. 
The  question  of  how  there  come  to  be  psalms  assigned 
to  David  in  each  of  the  other  three  books  we  may  pass, 
since  the  answer  is  not  easy,  particularly  from  material 
afforded  by  the  Psalms  themselves. 

I  called  attention  on  page  79  to  the  fact  that  the 
reviser  of  Ps.  14,  who  gave  it  the  form  which  we  call  Ps.  53, 
substituted  the  title  God  for  the  name  Jehovah  as  a  part 
of  his  revision.  This  change  may  indicate  only  a  personal 
preference.  It  might,  however,  reveal  a  type  of  thought 
characteristic  of  much  of  the  national  feeling.  In  either 
case  it  is  suggestive  to  compare  these  uses  of  the  divine 
titles  with  uses  which  occur  in  the  Hexateuch,  for 
example  in  the  first  and  second  chapters  of  Genesis.  In 
the  first  chapter,  or  rather  through  the  third  verse  of 
the  second  chapter,  the  title  God  alone  is  employed,  while 
following  that  there  is  a  combination  of  Jehovah  and 
God  into  a  single  title,  Jehovah  God,  and  elsewhere  in 
the  further  narrative  we  often  find  Jehovah  alone. 

Do  all  these  usages  concerning  the  divine  names, 
together  with  what  we  have  discovered  concerning  the 
sources  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  offer  a  suggestion 
concerning  the  literary  history  of  the  Old  Testament 
writings  ?  May  it  be  that  the  kingdom  of  Judah  came 
to  prefer  the  use  of  the  name  Jehovah  and  the  kingdom 
of  Israel  the  use  of  the  title  God?  In  view  of  their 
rivalry  in  other  respects  such  preferences  certainly  would 
not  have  been  strange.  And  is  it  possible  that,  after 
both  kingdoms  had  passed  away  and   the  Israehtish 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  83 

priestly  scribes  in  Babylonia  in  the  midst  of  polytheism 
felt  the  need  of  emphasizing  monotheism,  they  were  led 
to  use  the  title  God  rather  than  the  national  name 
Jehovah  ?  Apparently  they  may  have  done  so.  Such 
usage  would  not  have  been  unnatural.  Rather  it  would 
have  come  easily  out  of  the  situation  as  we  now  know  it. 
And  is  it  out  of  such  a  situation  that  the  use  of  Jehovah, 
Jehovah  God,  and  God,  as  we  find  these  titles  in  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets  and  the  Psalms,  arose  and  therein  find 
their  explanation?  Obviously  this  is  not  impossible; 
and  it  may  be  well  to  hold  this  suggestion  of  the  Bible 
itself  in  mind  until  we  have  other  evidence,  either  to 
disprove  or  to  confirm. 

In  estimating  this  suggestion,  especially  in  view  of  the 
terms  which  are  used  by  modern  writers  on  the  Old 
Testament,  we  should  know  that  the  Hebrew  word  for 
God  .is  transliterated  Elohim  (pronounced  eloheem). 
With  this  the  reader  should  recall  the  familiar  fact  that 
the  divine  name  for  the  deity  of  the  Israelites  is  trans- 
literated in  the  Revised  Version  as  Jehovah.  It  is  then 
seen  that  the  initial  letters  of  the  two  Hebrew  titles  for 
the  deity  are  E  and  /.  At  the  same  time  it  should  be 
known  that  Jehovah  is  not  an  actual  transliteration  of 
the  divine  name.  This  Hebrew  name  was  held  so  sacred 
among  the  people  of  Israel  that,  far  back  in  the  Old 
Testament  times,  they  stopped  pronouncing  it,  and,  as 
only  the  consonants  of  the  language  were  written,  only 
the  consonants  of  the  name  have  come  down  to  us. 
These,  as  usually  transliterated,  are  /  (or  F)  h  v  (or  w)  h, 
and  are  called  by  scholars  "the  tetragrammaton,"  that  is, 
"the  four-character"  ("name"  or  "word"  being  supplied 
in  thought). 


84  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Where  this  divine  name  occurrs  in  the  Hebrew, 
Israelitish  readers  pronounce  the  word  for  master,  lord. 
This  Hebrew  word  is  ordinarily  transliterated  adonai. 
Israelites  still  say  "Adonai"  when  in  reading  they  come 
to  the  divine  name.  Christians,  however,  as  early  as  the 
fourteenth  or  the  fifteenth  century  began  to  combine 
the  two  words,  pronouncing  the  consonants  J  hv  h  with 
modifications  of  the  vowels  of  adonai.  We  should 
expect  perhaps  as  an  outcome  such  a  word  as  Jahovaih, 
but  it  did  not  come  into  use.  Instead,  one  of  the  earliest 
results  of  the  combination  of  the  two  words  was  the  form 
Johouah.  Later  the  form  Jehovah  was  adopted.  This 
is  now  known  not  only  to  be  a  hybrid  term  but  also  to 
have  no  good  linguistic  basis  for  its  vowels. 

Careful  investigations  have  been  made  concerning 
the  original  pronunciation  of  the  divine  name  itself,  that 
is,  investigations  to  discover  the  vowel  sounds  which  were 
originally  a  part  of  the  name.  These  investigations 
offer  different  possibilities,  such  as  Jahveh,  Jahvah,  or 
even  Yahu.  Also,  since  the  J  is  pronounced  somewhat 
like  F,  and  the  v  represents  a  Hebrew  character  pro- 
nounced quite  like  w,  as  suggested  above,  the  name  is 
sometimes  written  Yahweh;  and  still  other  variations 
occur,  showing  that  scholars  are  still  much  in  doubt  as 
to  what  the  original  pronunciation  was. 

The  makers  of  the  Revised  Version  naturally  shrank 
from  such  a  radical  change  as  the  adoption  of  any  one 
of  the  preceding  forms.  Their  simplest  course  was  to 
employ  the  name  already  somewhat  in  use,  Jehovah. 
As  a  result,  the  readers  of  even  the  Revised  Version  are 
unacquainted  with  what  knowledge  we  have  concerning 
the  name  as  it  was  used  by  the  Israelites  in  early  times. 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  85 

While  this  study  of  the  titles  for  God  may  have 
seemed  to  take  us  aside  from  our  main  theme,  it  really 
has  only  thrown  light  on  it  and  has  given  opportunity 
to  observe  how  the  study  of  the  Psalms  is  not  only 
significant  in  itself  but  also  an  aid  in  understanding 
the  use  of  terms  in  a  study  of  the  growth  of  the  Law, 
the  Prophets,  and  the  Writings;  and  I  have  merely 
called  attention  to  aspects  of  the  Psalms  which  are 
most  important  for  the  history  of  the  book  and  for 
the  history  of  the  Old  Testament.  Passing  by  other 
interesting  questions,  therefore,  we  may  now  approach 
the  second  of  the  books  in  the  collection  of  the 
Writings. 

The  study  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs  approaches  in 
interest  that  of  the  Psalms.  Though  it  does  not  afford 
such  varied  data  concerning  its  history,  it  furnishes 
sufficient  to  illuminate  the  development  of  the  book. 
The  study  should  be  made  with  the  Revised  Version,  of 
course,  which  reveals  something  of  the  poetic  character 
of  this  piece  of  literature,  as  well  as  hints  concerning  its 
authorship,  which  the  Authorized  Version  conceals  or 
obscures. 

We  first  notice  the  title  contained  in  the  first  verse: 
"The  proverbs  of  Solomon  the  son  of  David,  king  of 
Israel."  All  thoughtful  readers  of  the  book  have  con- 
sidered it  at  one  time  or  another.  Ordinarily  the  reader 
assumes,  with  naturalness,  that  this  is  a  title  for  the 
entire  book.  If  he  reads  carefully  through  the  book, 
however,  he  discovers  in  the  first  verse  of  the  tenth 
chapter  that  a  similar  title,  but  briefer,  "The  proverbs 
of  Solomon,"  is  given  as  though  nothing  of  the  sort  had 
already  been  written.     Such  a  title  at  this  point  can 


86  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

hardly  have  been  an  insertion  into  the  completed  book. 
An  insertion  of  such  a  sort  would  be  absurd.  Instead 
of  thinking  of  the  title  here  as  an  insertion,  it  is  easiest 
to  understand  that  in  it  we  have  the  beginning  of  an 
original  collection  of  proverbs  ascribed  to  Solomon,  that 
chapters  i  to  9  are  another  collection,  or  possibly  col- 
lections, and  that  the  title  in  10:1  was  retained  in  its 
place  when  the  two  collections  were  brought  together. 
Already  then,  even  without  going  farther,  we  have 
evidence  from  the  Book  of  Proverbs  itself  that  it  is  a 
growth.  Moreover,  as  the  title  in  10:1  reads  "The" 
proverbs  of  Solomon,  the  collection  included  under  that 
title  appears  to  have  been  supposed  by  the  compiler  to 
be  all  of  the  proverbs  of  the  wise  king  then  known.  In 
this  matter,  however,  the  reader  who  does  not  under- 
stand the  Hebrew  language  must  be  warned  that  the 
Hebrew  expression  is  hardly  as  definite  as  the  English, 
and  the  title  may  be  translated  simply,  "Proverbs  of 
Solomon,"  though  perhaps  that  is  not  the  most  natural 
rendering.  Whatever  the  rendering,  it  does  not  change 
the  obvious  fact  that  already  in  the  first  half  of  the  Book 
of  Proverbs  we  have  at  least  two  collections  of  Solomonic 
sayings. 

Further  observant  reading  shows  that  the  book  as  it 
now  stands  contains  still  other  collections.  One  of 
these  begins  with  22:17  and  is  attributed  to  "the  wise," 
though  even  the  Revised  Version  leaves  the  title  obscure. 
It  becomes  clearer,  however,  as  soon  as  one  reads  on  to 
24:23  and  finds  the  title,  "These  also  are  sayings  of  the 
wise,"  thus  showing  that  we  have  here  two  short  col- 
lections of  proverbs  each  ascribed  to  the  well-known  men 
called  "the  wise." 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  87 

When  we  arrive  at  the  twenty-fifth  chapter  a  further 
title  is  no  less  striking  and  significant,  for  we  read, 
"These  also  are  proverbs  of  Solomon,  which  the  men  of 
Hezekiah  king  of  Judah  copied  out."  Here  then  we  are 
introduced  not  only  to  a  new  collection,  and  one  attrib- 
uted to  Solomon,  but  to  one  which  definitely  dates  itself 
as  later  than  the  days  of  Hezekiah.  How  it  came  about 
that  so  long  after  the  life  of  Solomon  sayings  purporting 
to  come  from  him  were  brought  together  and  attached 
to  a  compilation  of  at  least  four  collections  of  proverbs, 
two  of  which  were  ascribed  to  other  authors  than 
Solomon,  we  need  not  pause  now  to  discuss.  We  must 
be  impressed,  however,  with  the  manifest  evidence  that 
the  Book  of  Proverbs  as  a  whole  is  a  slowly  gathered 
compilation  of  various  Israelitish  sayings. 

There  are  still  two  other  titles  in  the  book  which 
heighten  this  impression.  Chapter  30  is  introduced  as 
*'The  words  of  Agur  the  son  of  Jakeh,"  and  at  the 
opening  of  chapter  31  we  find  the  heading,  ''The  words 
of  king  Lemuel;  the  oracle  which  his  mother  taught 
him,"  or,  as  the  Revisers  have  suggested  in  the  margin, 
and  certainly  a  very  interesting  title,  "The  words  of 
Lemuel  king  of  Massa,  which  his  mother  taught  him." 
Accordingly,  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs  as  a  whole  we  have 
at  least  seven  different  collections  of  wise  sayings  mani- 
festly assembled  at  the  end  of  a  somewhat  extended 
period,  time  enough  having  elapsed  between  two  of  the 
Solomonic  collections  for  two  others  to  have  been 
attached  to  one  of  the  earlier  collections  assigned  to  the 
wise  son  of  David. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing  it  should  not  be  forgotten 
that  the  book  belongs  to  the  third  division  of  the  Hebrew 


88  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Bible,  none  of  which  up  to  the  time  of  the  son  of  Sirach, 
some  two  centuries  B.C.,  had  yet  become  recognized  as 
on  a  par  with  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  in  estimate  and 
use  among  the  Israelites  in  Palestine,  though  a  more 
exalted  position  seems  to  have  been  accorded  some  of 
these  writings  among  the  sons  of  Israel  in  Egypt.  As 
in  the  case  of  the  Psalms,  however,  though  to  a  much  less 
extent,  the  Proverbs  were  used  as  Scripture  by  the  New 
Testament  writers  (cf .  p.  9) . 

In  the  Book  of  Job  there  is  comparatively  little  to 
indicate  its  origin,  or  the  time  from  which  it  came.  This 
is  largely  true  even  of  the  Hebrew;  it  is  even  more  the 
case  with  the  EngHsh  Version,  which  cannot  carry  over 
the  literary  hints  of  the  original  language.  There  are, 
however,  some  outstanding  facts.  One  of  these  is  that 
the  book  is  chiefly  a  poetical  work  and  is  the  outcome  of 
the  highest  poetical  art.  If  the  poetry  of  this  book  is 
compared  with  the  poems  imbedded  in  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets,  however,  striking  differences  in  form  and 
thought  will  be  apparent  at  once.  In  addition  to  these 
differences  the  Book  of  Job  is  a  long  composition  and 
exhibits  poetic  skill  of  a  sustained  character  as  well  as 
remarkable  in  quality. 

Another  important  fact  of  the  book,  as  bearing  on  the 
question  of  the  period  from  which  it  arose,  is  its  theme, 
the  age-long  problem  of  evil  and  the  suffering  of  good 
men.  This  characteristic  differentiates  it  from  the  early 
poetry  of  Israel.  The  author  was  a  philosopher  as  well 
as  a  poet.  As  philosophy  is  a  relatively  late  type  of 
reflection,  the  very  nature  of  the  subject-matter  of  Job 
indicates  that  it  belongs  to  the  later  period  of  IsraeHtish 
literature.     This   accords  with  its  place  in  the   third 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  89 

division  of  the  Old  Testament.  Altogether  the  hints 
of  the  book  itself  imply  that  it  was  written  at  least  later 
than  the  majority  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  Its 
ordinary  place  among  the  Writings,  third  in  the  list,  may 
be  due  to  its  length,  next  to  that  of  Psalms,  together  with 
its  bdng  regarded  as  subordinate  to  the  book  bearing  the 
name  of  the  great  king,  Solomon. 

The  Song  of  Songs  is  the  first  of  the  five  books 
designated  pre-eminently  by  the  Israelites  as  the  five 
Megilloth,  or  rolls,  which  were  read  in  connection  with 
the  celebrations  of  the  five  leading  sacred  days  of  the 
nation.  The  Song  of  Songs  was  used  with  the  Passover. 
Ruth  at  Pentecost,  Lamentations  at  the  ninth  of  the 
month  Ab  observed  for  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
Ecclesiastes  at  the  feast  of  Booths,  and  Esther  at  the 
feast  of  Purim.  In  view  of  these  facts  it  is  proper  to 
observe  that  these  five  writings  are  arranged  together 
and  in  the  above-mentioned  order  in  the  third  division 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  and  we  may  consider  them  in  the 
order  in  which  they  appear. 

The  Song  of  Songs,  like  the  Book  of  Job,  has  little 
evidence  within  it  to  show  the  period  from  which  it  arose 
or  what  led  to  its  arrangement  following  Job  in  the 
sacred  collection.  Possibly  the  five  Megilloth  first 
attained  a  special  sanction  in  relation  to  the  five  sacred 
days,  then  came  to  be  attached  to  each  other,  and  later 
were  given  place  next  in  importance  to  the  Psalms, 
Proverbs,  and  Job.  At  any  rate  the  position  which 
they  have  among  the  Writings,  particularly  as  following 
the  relatively  late  Book  of  Job,  suggests  that  they  were 
written  late  in  the  development  of  Israel's  literature,  or 
were  late  in  being  recognized  as  of  superior  worth  and 


90  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

sacredness.  It  is  not  out  of  harmony  with  this  that  the 
Song  of  Songs  is  dedicated  to  Solomon,  since  this  heading, 
like  headings  of  portions  of  the  Prophets,  of  some  of 
the  Psalms,  and  parts  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  is  most 
naturally  to  be  regarded  as  the  title  attached  to  the  book 
when  it  was  given  its  final  revision  and  form.  When 
this  occurred,  we  are  left  quite  in  doubt.  When  the  book, 
with  its  four  companion  Megilloth,  was  given  a  secure 
place  among  the  closed  collection  of  the  Writings  there 
is  nothing  even  in  the  New  Testament  to  indicate.  It 
is  possible,  therefore,  that  the  Writings  became  a  definite 
collection  only  after  the  days  of  Jesus  and  Paul,  and  that 
the  Song  was  not  regarded  as  sacred  until  Jesus  and  the 
apostle  had  completed  their  work. 

In  the  case  of  the  Book  of  Ruth  we  are  aided  some- 
what more,  but  not  at  all  as  we  should  desire.  There  is 
enough,  however,  to  make  clear  that  the  book  deals 
with  events  and  customs  long  previous  to  the  period  of 
the  author.  This  is  seen  from  the  opening  words,  ''the 
days  when  the  judges  judged,"  a  period  evidently  long 
anterior  to  the  writing  of  the  book.  It  is  seen  also  from 
the  parenthesis  of  4:7,  ''Now  this  was  the  custom  in 
former  times  in  Israel,"  and  from  the  genealogy  in 
4:18-22,  which  carries  the  composition  past  the  days  of 
David  and,  for  the  student  of  Hebrew,  in  view  of  some 
of  the  words  used,  perhaps  indicates  a  date  as  far  along 
as  the  exile.  The  fact  that  the  book  has  a  place  among 
the  Megilloth  and  in  the  midst  of  the  Writings  makes  it 
appear  probable,  for  the  same  reasons  as  in  the  case  of 
the  Song  of  Songs,  that  it  belongs  to  the  later  days  of  the 
literary  development  of  Israel.  Pointing  in  the  same 
direction  is  the  delicate  and  charming  dignity  given  to 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  91 

the  marriage  between  an  Israelite  and  a  woman  of  for- 
eign birth.  In  the  earlier  literature  the  question  of  in- 
ter marriage  with  non-Israelites  is  not  discussed;  such 
unions  were  taken  for  granted.  In  the  very  late  Book  of 
Nehemiah  (13:23-31)  the  subject  is  considered,  and 
such  unions  are  put  under  the  ban.  The  Book  of  Ruth 
reads  like  a  quiet  and  felicitous  protest  against  the  new 
and  narrow  point  of  view. 

Lamentations,  the  third  of  the  Megilloth,  is  another 
exquisitely  beautiful  poem  whose  literary  charm  can  be 
only  poorly  reproduced  in  English  dress.  The  fact  that 
the  poem  is  a  dirge  in  no  respect  lessens  its  beauty. 
From  the  book  itself  we  are  aided  httle  in  discovering 
the  time  and  place  of  the  author.  He  was  least  of  all 
concerned  about  preserving  such  marks  of  origin,  and 
we  are  left  in  extreme  doubt.  Indeed  there  are  some 
indications  to  the  Hebrew  student  that  this  poem,  like 
others  we  have  considered,  may  be  a  compilation,  the 
outgrowth  of  two  or  more  of  the  unknown  poets  whom 
Israel  produced.  Traditionally  it  is  connected  with  the 
prophet  Jeremiah,  and  there  is  no  impossibility  that 
some  of  his  poetic  oracles  may  have  been  a  basis  for  the 
poem  as  it  now  stands.  Its  place  among  the  Writings, 
however,  for  reasons  such  as  we  have  noted  in  the  other 
Megilloth,  perhaps  points  to  a  relatively  late  period  as 
the  time  of  its  composition  or  compilation. 

As  Lamentations  bears  a  title  which  amounts  to  a 
dedication  to  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  so  the  first  verse  of 
the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  looks  backward  to  the  days  of 
King  Solomon.  Other  than  this  dedication  to  the  wise 
king,  as  though  he  were  the  writer  of  the  work,  it  contains 
nothing  to  refer  its  composition  to  an  early  period  of 


92  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Israelitish  literary  history.  Its  place  among  the  Writ- 
ings, its  philosophic  attitude  and  method  of  thought,  its 
entire  unlikeness  to  the  literary  remains  of  the  Solomonic 
days,  and  the  characteristics  of  its  language  for  the 
Hebrew  student  all  lead  toward  a  date  after  the  exile 
as  the  time  of  its  composition.  With  these  considera- 
tions its  position  as  the  fourth  of  the  Megilloth,  suggesting 
the  same  conclusion,  should  be  kept  in  mind  as  we  pass 
on  to  the  Book  of  Esther. 

Esther,  as  the  fifth  of  the  Megilloth,  gives  far  more 
material  to  guide  in  forming  some  opinion  as  to  the  time 
when  it  was  written.  The  book  recounts  certain  inci- 
dents which  are  connected  with  the  reign  of  King 
Ahasuerus  of  Persia,  whom  we  know  better  in  history  as 
Xerxes,  whose  rule  began  about  485  B.C.  From  the  first 
verse  of  the  book  we  learn  that  the  writer  was  far  enough 
removed  from  the  time  of  Xerxes  so  that  the  period  of 
that  king  is  referred  to  as  "those  days."  This  leaves  no 
doubt  that  our  story  of  Esther  was  written  some  decades 
or  generations  after  Xerxes'  time,  and  thus  may  well 
belong  to  the  fourth  or  third  century  B.C.  Even  if  it 
were  composed  as  early  as  about  the  year  400,  the 
material  which  it  offers  in  its  relation  to  the  other 
Megilloth  and  the  Writings  as  a  whole  is  indicative  of  a 
relatively  late  date  both  for  itself  and  its  companion 
books. 

The  Book  of  Daniel,  for  the  reader  of  the  English 
Bible,  gives  the  chief  surprise  when  it  is  presented  as  a 
work  which  belongs  to  the  later  periods  of  Israel's 
literary  activity.  The  surprise  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  reader  has  grown  up  accustomed  to  think  of  Daniel 
as  one  of  the  prophets  and  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  as 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  93 

belonging  to  the  prophetic  writings.  The  place  of  the 
book  in  the  arrangement  of  the  Enghsh  translations  has 
made  this  thought  most  natural.  The  reader  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible  has  no  such  difficulty,  except  as  he  may 
have  been  first  only  a  reader  of  the  Enghsh  and  may 
have  experienced  something  of  a  shock  when,  for  the 
first  time,  he  became  aware  of  the  place  which  the  Book 
of  Daniel  holds  among  the  Israelitish  works  themselves. 
Recognizing  then  that  Daniel  not  only  belongs  among 
the  Writings  but  follows  the  Book  of  Esther,  which,  as 
we  have  seen,  leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  late  date  of  its 
authorship,  we  are  eager  to  see  directly  what  the  Book 
of  Daniel  furnishes  to  explain  the  place  which  was 
assigned  to  it  by  the  scribes  of  Israel. 

Turning  to  the  book,  then,  we  observe  that  it  makes 
no  claim  to  have  been  written  by  Daniel;  instead  it  is 
an  account  in  the  third  person,  a  story  about  Daniel 
written  at  some  period  later  than  that  to  which  he  is 
assigned  by  the  author  The  language  in  the  book  which 
is  ascribed  to  Daniel  is,  in  substance,  quotations  which 
are  embodied  by  the  author  within  his  own  work.  We 
are  left,  therefore,  to  material  in  the  book,  or  to  what  we 
can  learn  about  it  from  other  sources,  for  our  information 
as  to  the  date  when  the  writing  was  composed  and  the 
author  from  whom  it  came.  Our  method  of  study  gives 
first  place  to  what  the  book  itself  presents. 

Daniel  is  introduced  to  us  as  one  of  the  captives 
carried  away  at  the  time  of  the  exile.  At  some  later 
period  the  author  describes  events  which  he  connects 
with  the  remarkable  career  of  Daniel  and  some  of  his 
companions.  Such  a  portrayal  might  have  been  within 
two  or  three  generations,  or  it  might  easily  have  been 


94  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

much  later.  The  book  may  have  been  written,  accord- 
ingly, anywhere  from  550  B.C.  down  to  the  time  when  the 
several  books  included  in  the  Writings  were  brought 
together,  that  is,  as  late  as  the  time  of  Jesus  himself,  or 
later. 

As  an  aid  to  some  more  definite  period  within  those 
broad  limits,  two  or  three  considerations  may  be  noted. 
We  should  keep  in  mind  that  the  place  which  the  book 
occupies  among  the  Writings,  far  along  in  the  third 
division  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  is  undoubtedly  significant. 
We  may  recall,  as  mentioned  on  page  9,  the  high  regard 
in  which  the  book  was  held  in  the  days  of  the  New 
Testament,  or  rather  when  the  Apocalypse  of  John  (the 
Book  of  Revelation)  was  written,  and  may  place  this 
in  connection  with  the  fact  that  the  book  appears  not 
to  have  gained  any  recognition  until  after  the  Prophets 
became  a  closed  collection,  about  200  B.C.  It  is  entirely 
possible  then,  if  not  probable,  that  this  story  of  visions 
was  composed  as  late  as  the  second  century  before  the 
time  of  Jesus,  and  yet,  in  view  of  its  special  character, 
attained  to  the  distinction  it  enjoyed  in  the  apostolic 
days,  though  only  two  or  three  centuries  had  passed 
since  it  was  written. 

The  "special  character"  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  and 
the  exceptional  attention  which  was  given  it  by  the 
author  of  the  last  book  of  the  New  Testament  are  worthy 
of  further  thought.  Indeed  the  two  facts  are  so  closely 
related  as  to  be  essentially  one.  This  is  to  be  seen  in 
part  from  the  Greek  title  of  our  Book  of  Revelation. 
That  title  is  Apocalypse.  The  service  which  it  renders 
is  to  connect  the  last  book  of  the  New  Testament  with 
the  considerable  number  of  writings  outside  the  Bible 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  95 

which  are  also  apocalypses.  The  word  apocalypse 
means  ''that  which  reveals,"  so  that  the  mission  of 
apocalyptic  literature  in  general  was  the  revealing  of  the 
future.  This  may  be  seen  from  the  reading  of  any  one 
of  these  books.  The  writers  of  this  literature  made  use 
of  the  great  names  in  the  history  of  Israel  for  working 
out  this  apocalyptic  idea.  Thus  there  are  apocalyptic 
books  connected  with  the  names  of  Moses,  Isaiah,  Ezra, 
and  others. 

To  this  class  of  apocalyptic  literature  the  Book  of 
Daniel  obviously  belongs,  since  its  chief  purpose  is  to 
picture  things  from  the  time  of  Daniel,  the  days  of  the 
exile,  on  to  later  times.  This  constitutes  its  special 
character.  In  this  fact  we  may  well  have  some  hint 
concerning  the  period  of  its  composition. 

It  will  be  sufficient  for  the  purpose  in  hand  if  the 
reader  will  turn  to  the  eleventh  chapter  of  Daniel,  begin 
at  the  fortieth  verse,  read  carefully  to  the  end  of  the 
chapter,  and  observe  how  peoples  and  places  are  men- 
tioned specifically,  and  how  the  narrative  deals  with 
details.  Let  these  facts  impress  themselves  clearly. 
Then  read  on  into  the  twelfth  chapter,  notice  how  the 
language  soon  becomes  general  rather  than  specific,  how 
it  begins  to  lose  grasp  of  details,  and  how  the  author 
represents  Daniel  himself  as  being  quite  in  doubt  con- 
cerning the  things  which  are  to  occur. 

Now  let  the  reader  turn  to  the  Apocalypse  and 
observe  the  language  in  1:3:  "for  the  time  is  at  hand." 
The  writer  warns  the  reader  at  the  very  outset  of  the 
book  that  it  deals  with  events  then  present.  Turn  now 
to  22:10  and  find  the  same  significant  words  repeated: 
''for  the  time  is  at  hand." 


96  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

One  sees  directly  that  the  writer  of  the  Apocalypse 
was  not  looking  to  a  distant  future  for  the  realization  of 
the  pictures  he  portrayed.  He  was  manifestly  writing 
of  things  which  were  part  of  his  own  time.  The  visions 
of  his  book  are  apocalyptic  pictures  of  things  which  were 
conceived  as  consummating  just  then.  In  a  word,  he 
had  employed  pictures  to  describe  events  known  to  his 
readers,  national  events  connected  with  Greek,  Mace- 
donian, and  Roman  powers,  and  would  have  his  readers 
see  the  meaning  of  these  events  at  the  moment.  In 
short,  he  was  writing  well-known  history  in  the  form  of 
prediction,  putting  it  in  the  form  of  symbol  as  the  one 
which  would  best  serve  the  needs  of  those  for  whom  he 
had  been  led  to  pen  a  book  of  sympathy,  comfort,  con- 
solation, and  renewal  of  needed  courage. 

The  Book  of  Daniel  does  not,  in  so  many  words, 
advise  its  readers  that  ''the  time  is  at  hand."  It  does, 
however,  as  clearly  as  the  Book  of  Revelation,  deal  with 
events  consummating  at  the  time  the  book  was  written. 
This  is  the  meaning  of  such  language  as  that  at  the  close 
of  the  eleventh  chapter,  referred  to  above;  and  it  is 
equally  clear  from  the  figurative  mention  of  a  relatively 
few  days  in  the  twelfth  chapter  (vss.  ii,  12). 

In  other  words,  the  apocalyptic  writer,  when  he 
passes  from  the  narration  of  details  of  history  to  the 
general  forecast  of  release  from  the  dreadful  conditions 
which  he  depicts,  thereby  tells  us  the  time  out  of  which 
he  writes.  If  his  symbolic  language  is  sufficiently 
definite  to  permit  us  to  identify  the  events  to  which  he 
refers,  we  can  discover  quite  accurately  the  date  of  his 
authorship.  It  is  as  though  an  American  writer  in  191 7 
should  write  the  history  of  the  United  States  up  to  that 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  97 

moment,  sketching  events  largely  by  symbols,  and  then, 
in  the  face  of  world-carnage,  after  quite  specij&c  reference 
to  present  events,  should  close  his  book  with  general 
suggestions  concerning  the  world-outcome.  The  future 
student  of  American  history,  acquainted  with  the  events 
of  the  year  191 7,  would  be  able  to  ascertain  from  the 
supposed  American  apocalyptic  itself  that  it  was  written 
in  the  third  or  fourth  year  of  the  world-war. 

Altogether  an  apocalypse,  briefly  described,  is 
chiefly  history  written  in  the  form  of  prediction.  The 
Book  of  Daniel  is  such  a  work.  The  writer  of  the  book 
surveyed  selected  aspects  of  Israelitish  and  related 
history  up  to  his  own  time,  describing  the  events  largely 
in  symbol,  doing  this  with  considerable  detail,  and  then, 
in  what  we  call  the  twelfth  chapter,  sketched  a  general 
outcome  from  such  history  and  immediate  conditions. 
The  desperate  situation  in  which  the  Israelitish  nation 
found  itself  was  quite  sufiicient  occasion  for  such  method 
of  approach.  A  preacher-historian  of  another  nation 
might  not  have  adopted  such  a  method ;  it  was  adopted 
in  Israel  and  served  its  purpose.  As  a  result  the  Book 
of  Daniel  is  the  classic  representative  of  Israelitish 
apocal3^tic  literature  and  presents  to  us  this  type  of 
writing  in  its  most  exalted  form.  For  a  fuller  under- 
standing of  its  significance  one  should  read  the  encyclo- 
pedia articles  on  apocalyptic  literature  and  the  works 
there  referred  to.  It  is  sufficient  for  our  purpose  here  to 
discover,  as  we  have,  how  the  Book  of  Daniel  itself,  when 
properly  approached,  discloses  its  apocalyptic  character 
and  gives  the  key  to  its  understanding. 

Using  the  key  to  discover  the  date  of  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  what  do  we  find  ?    The  answer  has  already  been 


98  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

suggested  as  emerging  from  the  material  at  the  close  of 
the  eleventh  chapter.  There  are  indications  in  other 
portions  of  the  book  also.  Without  taking  space  to 
discuss  the  possibilities  in  detail,  it  will  be  enough  for 
the  purpose  of  this  study  to  say  that  careful  examination 
of  the  work  has  led  to  the  conclusion  that  the  material 
symbolically  presented  in  the  book  points  to  the  terrible 
Maccabean  struggle  against  Antiochus  Epiphanes  as 
the  time  out  of  which  the  author  wrote.  This  makes  the 
date  of  composition  about  165  B.C.,  and  the  conclusion 
fits  in  with  the  considerations  of  literary  form  and  place 
of  the  book  among  the  Writings,  as  we  have  already 
noted  the  possibilities  in  those  directions. 

We  have  yet  to  consider  the  growth  of  Ezra- 
Nehemiah  and  Chronicles,  and  these  may  fittingly  be 
taken  up  together  because  of  the  relationship  which 
exists  between  the  two  books. 

While  Ezra-Nehemiah  precedes  Chronicles  in  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  the  material  included  in  Chronicles  deals 
with  time  previous  to  that  covered  by  Ezra-Nehemiah. 
This  may  be  seen  by  noticing  that  Chronicles  presents 
an  outline  sketch  of  history  from  the  beginning  of  time 
to  the  days  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  that  the  Book  of 
Ezra-Nehemiah  continues  that  history.  This  relation- 
ship is  so  pronounced  that  the  last  two  verses  of  Chron- 
icles are  repeated  as  the  beginning  of  Ezra-Nehemiah 
(Ezra  1:1-30).  The  style  of  language  also  is  an  indi- 
cation to  the  student  of  Hebrew  that  the  two  books  come 
from  a  single  author,  or  school  of  authors. 

Accordingly  the  date  of  composition  of  the  entire 
work  is  not  earlier  than  the  latest  of  the  events 
mentioned.     These  may  be  the  portion  of  the  genealogies 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  99 

contained  in  I  Chron.  3:19-24,  which  seems  to  carry 
the  lists  of  names  six  generations  later  than  Zerubbabel 
and  so  perhaps  as  far  along  as  350  or  325  B.C.  With 
these  indications  of  date  it  should  be  kept  in  mind  that 
the  main  structure  of  Ezra-Nehemiah  is  regularly  in  the 
third  person  and  shows  how  the  events  narrated  belonged 
to  the  past,  perhaps  some  distance  in  the  past.  The 
addresses  of  the  leaders,  Ezra  and  others,  are  quotations 
embodied  in  the  main  structure  by  the  compiler.  Alto- 
gether, then,  Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah,  as  a  continuous 
sketch  of  one  aspect  of  Israel's  history,  is  manifestly  a 
late  work.  Though  earlier,  it  may  be,  than  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  it  was  placed  last  in  the  arrangement  of  the 
Writings,  very  likely  because  at  the  time  the  arrange- 
ment was  made  Daniel  was  more  highly  regarded  and  was 
given  the  preference  of  order.  This  inference  seems  the 
more  natural  when  we  remember,  as  stated  on  page  15, 
that  the  final  arrangement  of  the  Writings  had  not 
occurred  in  the  New  Testament  times,  when  the  Book 
of  Daniel  was  receiving  far  greater  attention  than  any 
of  the  other  books  of  the  Writings  except  Psalms. 

Before  we  leave  Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah  it  is 
worth  while  to  recall  some  of  the  sources  which  this 
outline  history  mentions,  since  they  may  otherwise  be 
overlooked,  though  they  are  significant.  There  is,  for 
example,  the  source,  or  rather  list  of  sources,  contained 
in  I  Chron.  29:29,  where  we  read:  "Now  the  acts  of 
David  the  king,  first  and  last,  behold,  they  are  written 
in  the  history  of  Samuel  the  seer,  and  in  the  history  of 
Nathan  the  prophet,  and  in  the  history  of  Gad  the  seer. 
.  .  .  ."  This  statement  is  informing  because  it  cites 
sources  for  the  history  of  the  times  of  David  which  are 


lOO  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

not  referred  to  in  the  Book  of  Kings  (cf.  pp.  28-29). 
Apparently,  therefore,  these  sources  are  relatively  late, 
later  than  the  compilation  of  the  Prophets,  and  not  at 
all  contemporary  with  the  events  with  which  they  dealt. 

With  the  foregoing  it  is  well  to  place  the  language 
found  in  II  Chron.  9:29  as  follows:  "Now  the  rest  of 
the  acts  of  Solomon,  first  and  last,  are  they  not  written 
in  the  history  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  and  in  the  prophecy 
of  Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  and  in  the  visions  of  Iddo  the 
seer  concerning  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat?"  Thus 
two  further  sources  are  indicated  in  addition  to  those 
in  the  previous  quotation,  sources  which  are  not  men- 
tioned among  those  which  were  used  for  the  compilation 
of  the  Book  of  Kings. 

It  is  equally  suggestive  to  think  of  the  source  material 
referred  to  in  II  Chron.  12:15:  "Now  the  acts  of 
Rehoboam,  first  and  last,  are  they  not  written  in  the 
histories  of  Shemaiah  the  prophet  and  of  Iddo  the  seer, 
after  the  manner  of  genealogies?"  Thus  we  have  not 
only  a  further  source  of  the  Chronicles  but  also  an 
intimation  concerning  the  nature  of  these  sources;  they 
were  primarily  genealogies.  Indirectly  we  are  advised 
how,  in  the  later  periods  of  Israelitish  Hfe,  some  of  her 
writers  gave  special  attention  to  the  study  of  family  and 
tribal  relationships.  The  Book  of  Chronicles  itself  is 
evidence  of  that  fact. 

We  have  now  completed  our  survey  of  the  growth  of 
the  Hebrew  Bible,  our  Old  Testament,  as  that  growth 
is  to  be  learned  from  the  writings  themselves.  The 
survey  is  hardly  more  than  an  outline  and  has  nothing 
of  the  completeness  which  full  consideration  of  all  the 
material  would  require.     Completeness,  however,   has 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  WRITINGS  loi 

been  no  part  of  my  purpose.  I  have  had  in  mind  rather 
the  point  of  view  and  the  method  of  approach  which  the 
Bible  itself  ofifers  as  the  proper  one  for  those  who  desire 
to  learn  how  the  Scriptures  have  come  to  us. 

As  an  outcome  of  our  survey  some  impressions  are 
distinct.  We  are  aware  that  the  Old  Testament  is  the 
final  result  of  a  long  series  of  compilations  coming  from 
the  hands  of  various  compilers  who  employed  many 
sources  and  sources  of  various  kinds.  A  careful  study 
of  the  life  of  the  people  and  their  circumstances  would 
disclose  how  such  a  course  of  literary  development  was 
natural,  and  why  one  should  not  be  surprised  that  the 
Bible  reveals  the  development  which  he  finds. 

One  is  likely  to  have  received  another  impression 
equally  significant.  He  feels  that  the  order  of  the 
writings  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  is  largely  the  order  in  which 
the  various  books  were  completed  and  accepted  as  the 
component  parts  of  the  sacred  writings  of  the  nation. 
There  are  exceptions,  some  of  which  have  been  indicated 
and  discussed,  but  on  the  whole  the  order  of  the  books  as 
they  are  preserved  is  very  much  the  order  in  which  they 
were  compiled.  If  this  is  kept  in  mind  it  makes  much 
easier  the  effort  to  locate  the  Old  Testament  books  in 
the  order  in  which  they  arose. 

It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  order 
of  the  present  books  does  not  necessarily  correspond 
with  the  order  of  origin  of  the  sources.  Frequently  the 
compilers  brought  together  sources  from  widely  separate 
periods  of  literary  development.  In  the  Book  of 
Genesis,  for  example,  we  have  side  by  side  a  late  account 
of  the  creation  (Gen.  i:i — 2:4a)  and  the  much  earlier 
account  contained  in  the  following  verses.    The  compiler 


I02  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

regarded  the  later  account  as  better  for  the  opening  of 
his  narrative  and  gave  it  the  place  of  preference.  It  is 
the  compilation,  this  combining  of  the  different  accounts 
near  the  days  of  Ezra,  which  shows  the  chronological 
place  of  our  present  Book  of  Genesis  and  the  beginning 
of  our  Old  Testament. 

The  Book  of  Psalms  is  another  outstanding  example 
of  the  combination  of  early  sources  with  late  and  of  the 
late  formation  of  the  work  as  a  whole.  Some  of  the 
separate  psalms,  or  portions  of  them,  were  composed  in 
an  early  day.  The  persistent  connection  of  the  name  of 
David  with  the  collected  work  carries  us  back  to  his 
time  as  that  when  the  beginnings  occurred.  But  the 
collection  as  a  whole,  with  its  five  divisions,  may  date 
from  the  New  Testament  period,  or  the  days  not  long 
before. 

The  order  of  development  is  particularly  manifest  in 
the  arrangement  of  the  three  general  divisions  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Writings. 
First  the  Law  was  developed  and  became  a  distinct  and 
definite  collection  of  sacred  literature,  about  450  B.C. 
About  two  and  one-half  centuries  later  the  Prophets 
arrived  at  a  similar  point  of  recognition.  Neither  the 
Old  Testament  nor  the  New  gives  any  information  as  to 
when  the  third  division  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  became 
a  distinct  collection  and  assumed  its  place  following  the 
other  two.  Apparently  the  Writings  did  not  attain  this 
position  until  after  the  days  of  Jesus  and  Paul  and  after 
the  composition  of  many  of  the  New  Testament  books. 


CHAPTER   IX 
THE  HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED   INTO  GREEK 

The  quotation  from  the  Prologue  of  the  Book  of 
Ecclesiasticus  (p.  ii)  has  already  called  attention  to 
the  translating  of  Hebrew  literature  into  Greek.  The 
author  of  the  Prologue  made  such  a  translation  of  some 
of  the  works  of  his  grandfather.  This  occurred  in  the 
second  half  of  the  second  century  B.C. 

That  this  was  not  the  first  time  that  Hebrew  thought 
was  translated  and  given  a  Greek  dress  is  easily  seen. 
From  much  earlier  days,  as  every  student  of  Greek  and 
Egyptian  history  knows,  there  had  been  Greek  colonies 
in  Egypt,  and  their  language  and  literature  had  assumed 
a  prominent  place  in  the  land  of  the  Pharaohs,  particu- 
larly for  purposes  of  business  and  commerce.  As  Greeks 
had  gone  to  the  attractive  Egyptian  shores  and  adapted 
themselves  and  their  language  to  the  new  conditions,  so 
had  many  of  the  sons  of  Israel.  How  early  Israelitish 
emigration  into  the  land  of  the  Nile  occurred  may  be 
seen  from  such  statements  as  those  in  Isa.  ii :  ii,  27: 13, 
Zech.  10:10,  and  especially  the  long  account  beginning 
at  Jer.  42:13  and  continuing  through  the  forty-fourth 
chapter.  As  early  as  about  600  B.C.,  accordingly, 
many  of  the  Israelites  went  to  Egypt  to  live.  While 
there  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  they  soon  forgot  their 
native  tongue,  it  is  very  certain  that  in  the  passing  of 
generations,  with  the  adaptability  which  has  ever  char- 
acterized them,  they  became  familiar  with  the   Greek 

103 


I04  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

language,  already  a  chief  medium  of  trade  in  Egypt, 
and  found  themselves  largely  dependent  upon  it. 

One  of  the  chief  evidences  for  the  preceding  state- 
ments is  the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  into 
Greek.  This  translation  is  ordinarily  called  the  Sep- 
tuagint.  This  title,  from  the  Latin  word  septuaginta, 
meaning  "seventy,"  is  later  than  the  translation  and 
connects  it  with  the  tradition  of  its  origin  as  given,  for 
example,  by  Josephus  {Antiquities  of  the  Jews  xii.  2), 
according  to  which  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek  was  the 
work  of  seventy  (or  seventy-two)  translators  invited 
from  Palestine  •  to  Egypt  by  Ptolemy  Philadelphus 
about  275  B.C.  From  what  we  have  already  gathered 
concerning  the  origin  and  growth  of  the  Old  Testament, 
it  is  evident  that  all  of  it  was  not  translated  into  Greek 
as  early  as  the  third  century  B.C.;  the  Book  of  Daniel  at 
least,  at  that  date,  appears  not  yet  to  have  been  written. 
At  the  same  time,  what  we  have  noted  of  the  way  in 
which  Jews  went  to  Egypt  as  early  as  the  days  of  Jere- 
miah makes  clear  that  their  descendants,  as  far  back  as 
the  third  century  B.C.,  may  very  naturally  have  become 
so  adapted  to  the  Greek  language  as  to  feel  the  need  for 
a  translation  of  some  of  their  Hebrew  Scriptures,  par- 
ticularly the  Law,  and  thus  a  beginning  of  the  transla- 
tion may  have  been  made.  We  need  not  stop  for  the 
present  to  ascertain  when  the  translation  was  com- 
pleted. 

It  is  more  important,  for  the  immediate  purposes  of 
our  study,  to  notice  what  the  contents  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  Greek  are,  and  what  they  indicate  concerning 
the  growth  of  the  Bible  as  a  whole.  Fortunately  this 
is  comparatively  easy,  since  the  Septuagint   has  come 


HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  GREEK     105 

down  to  us  and  is  easily  accessible  not  only  for  the 
Greek  student  but  also  in  English  translation.  Indeed 
the  Greek  has  been  preserved  in  somewhat  variant 
forms.  These  variations,  however,  are  not  serious  as 
far  as  the  main  contents  and  the  order  of  the  books  are 
concerned;  in  fact,  the  differences  may  furnish  some  aid 
in  ascertaining  the  growth  which  we  desire  to  understand. 

In  our  search  we  may  best  make  use  of  the  edition 
of  Henry  Barclay  Swete,  the  most  recent  and  published 
in  such  form  as  to  be  easily  used,  as  it  is  considered  the 
most  accurate.  The  full  title  is  The  Old  Testament  in 
Greek  According  to  the  Septuagint.  It  was  issued  in 
three  volumes  by  the  Cambridge  University  Press,  the 
first  volume  appearing  in  1887,  the  second  in  1891,  and 
the  third  in  1894. 

On  opening  these  volumes  we  are  at  once  impressed 
with  the  order  in  which  the  books  appear,  for,  trans- 
literated into  their  ordinary  English  forms,  they  are  as 
follows : 


I.  Genesis 

16. 

II  Ezra 

2.  Exodus 

17- 

Psalms 

3.  Leviticus 

18. 

Proverbs 

4.  Numbers 

19. 

Ecclesiastes 

5.  Deuteronomy 

20. 

Song  of  Songs 

6.  Joshua 

21. 

Job 

7.  Judges 

22. 

Wisdom  of  Solomon 

8.  Ruth 

23- 

Ecclesiasticus 

9.  I  Kings 

24. 

Esther 

10.  II  Kings 

25- 

Judith 

II.  Ill  Kings 

26. 

Tobit 

12.   IV  Kings 

27. 

Hosea 

13.  I  Chronicles 

28. 

Amos 

14.  II  Chronicles 

29. 

Micah 

15.  I  Ezra 

3°- 

Joel 

io6  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

31.  Obadiah  42.  Lamentations 

32.  Jonah  43.  Epistle  of  Jeremiah 

33.  Nahum  44.  Ezekiel 

34.  Habakkuk  45.  Daniel 

35.  Zephaniah  46.  Susanna 

36.  Haggai  47.  Bel  and  the  Dragon 

37.  Zechariah  48.  I  Maccabees 

38.  Malachi  49.  II  Maccabees 

39.  Isaiah  50.  Ill  Maccabees 

40.  Jeremiah  51.  IV  Maccabees 

41.  Baruch  52.  Psalms  of  Solomon 

The  reader  of  the  English  Bible  observes  in  these 
titles  much  that  is  familiar,  and  he  is  equally  impressed 
with  considerable  which  appears  strange.  Of  the  famil- 
iar names,  I  Kings  and  II  Kings  appear  in  place  of  the 
two  Books  of  Samuel,  III  Kings  and  IV  Kings  replace 
I  Kings  and  II  Kings,  I  Ezra  and  II  Ezra  are  new,  one 
looks  for  Nehemiah  in  vain,  and  the  order  of  the  various 
books  of  the  Prophets  is  quite  unexpected. 

The  unfamiliar  titles,  however,  probably  make  the 
chief  impression.  They  are  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  Eccle- 
siasticus,  Judith,  Tobit,  Baruch,  Epistle  of  Jeremiah, 
Susanna,  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  the  four  Books  of  Mac- 
cabees, and  the  Psalms  of  Solomon,  altogether  thirteen. 

One  notices  also  that  the  threefold  division  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible  is  disregarded.  The  books  of  the  Law 
retain  their  position  at  the  head  of  the  list  and  in  the 
familiar  order,  but  the  Prophets  as  we  have  found  them 
collected  and  emphasized  as  the  second  main  division  of 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures  are  scattered  and  rearranged, 
the  so-called  Minor  Prophets  receiving  precedence  in 
place.  The  Writings  have  been  handled  as  freely  as 
the  Prophets. 


HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  GREEK     107 

The  reader  at  once  desires  an  explanation  of  what 
is  before  him.  Unfortunately  the  explanation  is  not 
wholly  easy  to  give.  There  are,  however,  some  aids 
toward  an  explanation.  One  of  these  is  the  fact  that  the 
books  of  the  preceding  list,  substantially  in  that  order 
and  number,  composed  the  Old  Testament  of  the  early 
Christians.  Professor  Swete,  in  his  edition  of  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  merely  reproduced  the  contents  of  the  ancient 
Vatican  manuscript,  as  far  as  it  contains  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  supplied  what  it  lacks  from  other  similar  man- 
uscripts. These  ancient  manuscripts  were  written  in 
the  fourth  or  fifth  century  a.d.  and  carry  the  evidence 
back  that  far  with  certainty.  As  they  give  every  evi- 
dence of  having  been  copied  from  generally  accepted 
earlier  manuscripts,  they  really  show  the  books  which 
were  used  by  the  Christians  of  the  third  century,  and 
possibly  of  the  second  or  first,  thus  revealing  substan- 
tially the  Old  Testament  as  it  was  known  by  those  of  the 
apostolic  days.  Paul  himself  may  have  been  acquainted 
with  most  of  the  books  comprised  in  the  list. 

A  second  aid  toward  an  explanation  of  the  books  in- 
cluded in  the  Greek  Old  Testament  is  the  fact  that  the 
Greek  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  began  among  the 
Israelites  in  Egypt,  as  we  have  seen  above.  Whether 
all  the  translating  was  done  there  we  cannot  say,  but 
what  we  do  know  points  to  the  conclusion  that  Egypt 
was  the  home  of  this  important  transfer  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  into  the  world-language  of  the  time.  Alexan- 
dria was  perhaps  the  most  cosmopolitan  city  of  that  age, 
a  center  of  culture,  learning,  business,  and  commerce, 
and  a  gathering-place  of  nations.  Such  a  center  always 
tends  to  liberality  of  thought  and  comprehensiveness  of 


io8  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

views,  in  religion  as  well  as  in  other  affairs.  In  a  situa- 
tion of  that  type  it  was  natural  that  even  the  sons  of 
Israel  should  take  a  wider  view  of  Judaism  and  her 
sacred  books  than  was  taken  in  Palestine.  They  ac- 
cepted books  which  were  never  favorably  regarded  by 
their  Palestinean  brothers;  the  preceding  list,  inherited 
by  Christianity  from  Egyptian  Israel,  is  ample  evidence 
of  this.  In  short,  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek  is  easily 
explained  as  arising  out  of  the  Jewish- Greek  life  in 
Egypt.  We  can  understand  why  so  large  a  number  of 
writings  were  recognized  as  Scripture  by  the  Jews  in 
the  land  of  the  Nile;  it  is  difficult  to  find  an  Israelitish 
community  elsewhere  which  would  have  been  likely 
to  accept  so  many  books  that  were  unacceptable  at 
Jerusalem. 

A  further  aid  toward  understanding  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  Greek  is  furnished  in  the  Prologue  to  the  Book 
of  Ecclesiasticus  (quoted  on  pp.  11-12  above).  This 
aid  is  the  author's  threefold  mention  of  books  in  addi- 
tion to  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  books  which  he  evi- 
dently regarded  as  of  value  similar  to  that  of  the  two 
collections  named.  This  regard  for  those  books  has 
already  been  noted  in  chapter  i  (pp.  13).  Now  we 
are  in  better  position  to  feel  its  significance.  There  it 
disclosed  a  wider  field  of  sacred  Jewish  literature  in 
Egypt  than  in  Palestine.  Now  we  see  that  the  exist- 
ence of  such  a  large  body  of  sacred  Jewish  books  in 
Egypt  paved  the  way  for  the  early  Christians  to  inherit 
from  the  Egyptian  Israelites  a  much  larger  Old  Testa- 
ment than  would  have  come  to  them  from  the  land  of 
Palestine.  The  beginnings  of  the  larger  Old  Testament 
had  occurred  in  the  second,  and  possibly  at  the  close  of 


HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  GREEK     109 

the  third,  century  B.C.  as  the  result  of  Jewish  life  about 
the  borders  of  the  Nile. 

Thus  we  have  a  natural  and  satisfactory  explanation 
of  the  origin  of  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek.  Concern- 
ing the  details  of  the  development  we  are  not  informed, 
but  the  books  themselves  are  evidence  that  they  were 
translated,  or  written,  where  Israelites  had  adopted  the 
Greek  language  as  their  ordinary  speech  while  they 
remained  faithful  to  the  teaching  of  their  fathers  and 
therefore  revered  their  sacred  writings. 

The  words  "translated,  or  written"  I  have  Just  used 
intentionally  as  opening  the  way  to  a  further  important 
consideration.  This  is  the  question  whether  the  thir- 
teen books  of  the  Greek  Old  Testament,  in  addition  to 
the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Writings,  were  written 
in  Hebrew  and  translated  into  Greek,  or  whether  some 
or  all  of  them  were  composed  in  Greek  and  combined 
with  the  Greek  translation  of  those  which  were  com- 
posed in  Hebrew.  Important  as  the  question  is,  how- 
ever, we  do  not  need  here  to  discuss  it  at  length.  There 
is  need  only  to  mention  that  the  answer  evidently  hinges 
on  a  study  of  the  language  of  the  books.  This  leads  to 
the  conclusion  that  some  of  the  books  were  first  written 
in  Hebrew,  for  example,  I  Maccabees,  and  that  others  as 
certainly  were  composed  in  Greek,  for  example,  the  Wis- 
dom of  Solomon.  This  is  valuable  for  our  study.  It 
shows  that  the  Egyptian  Jews  did  not  feel  that  the  use 
of  the  Hebrew  language  was  essential  as  an  element  of 
one  of  their  sacred  writings. 

Along  with  the  facts  thus  gathered  we  should  no- 
tice the  meaning  of  the  entire  rearrangement  of  the 
order  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  in  its   Greek 


no  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

dress.  The  list  itself  has  already  emphasized  that  rear- 
rangement. It  shows  that  the  marked  line  between  the 
Prophets  and  the  Writings  has  been  removed,  and  that 
the  books  outside  of  the  Law  have  been  combined  in  an 
entirely  new  way,  either  by  accident  or  as  the  result 
of  a  new  idea  as  to  what  the  arrangement  ought  to  be. 
Whether  by  accident  or  by  design,  the  new  arrangement 
discloses  a  sense  of  freedom  on  the  part  of  those  respon- 
sible for  the  change.  They  undoubtedly  knew  of  the 
threefold  division;  the  Prologue  of  Ecclesiasticus  is  evi- 
dence for  a  knowledge  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  at 
least.  But  even  the  faithful  scribes  in  Egypt  did  not 
feel  controlled  by  the  established  division,  and  the 
Prophets  were  handled  as  freely  as  the  later  works  which 
Egyptian  Jews  were  led  to  include  in  their  sacred  col- 
lection as  a  whole.  One  wonders  if  this  means  that,  as 
far  back  as  the  closing  of  the  Prophets  in  Palestine, 
which  we  have  seen  to  have  been  as  early  as  200  b.c, 
or  earlier,  the  spirit  of  Judaism  in  Egypt  was  of  the  freer 
type,  and  the  Prophets  as  a  separate  collection  never 
possessed  the  significance  and  restraint  for  Israel  in 
Egypt  which  they  received  in  Palestine.  If  such  was 
the  fact,  it  helps  to  account  for  the  order  of  the  Old 
Testament  books  in  Greek. 

Thus  we  have  the  Greek  Old  Testament,  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  before  us.  It  claims  our  interest  in  the  ways 
that  have  been  mentioned;  and  it  would  be  almost  as 
attractive  in  other  ways,  which  must  be  passed  over 
wholly  or  nearly  so,  because  they  are  not  essential 
for  the  purpose  we  have  in  mind.  Let  me  merely 
mention  one  of  the  aspects  of  the  study  of  the 
Septuagint, 


HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  GREEK     iii 

In  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  in  Hebrew,  and  in  our  ordi- 
nary English  versions,  the  prophecies  against  the  na- 
tions are  contained  in  chapters  46  to  5 1  inclusive.  Not 
so  in  the  Septuagint.  There  chapter  25  is  broken  at  the 
end  of  verse  13,  and  the  prophecies  against  the  nations 
are  inserted,  verse  14  is  omitted,  and,  after  the  proph- 
ecies against  the  nations  have  been  included,  the  trans- 
lation is  resumed  with  25:15  of  the  Hebrew  and  the 
ordinary  English.  In  addition  to  that  the  prophecies 
against  the  nations  have  an  arrangement  in  the  Greek 
entirely  different  from  that  in  the  Hebrew.  Still  fur- 
ther, as  an  outcome  of  all  the  variations  in  the  Greek 
book,  the  Septuagint  as  a  whole  is  only  about  seven- 
eighths  the  length  of  the  Hebrew. 

Such  differences  between  the  Hebrew  and  the  Greek 
of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  manifestly  raise  urgent  ques- 
tions. We  want  to  know  how  such  differences  arose, 
and  we  are  likely  to  ask  whether  the  translator,  or  trans- 
lators, omitted  portions  of  the  Hebrew  text. 

It  is  quite  possible,  of  course,  that  the  translator 
omitted  parts  of  the  Hebrew.  To  assume  that  he  did, 
however,  does  not  account  for  the  entire  rearrangement 
of  the  prophecies  in  the  Septuagint.  Ordinarily  too  a 
translator  is  more  disposed  to  make  additions  to  his 
text,  so  that  the  translation  is  longer  than  the  original, 
these  additions  being  helpful  as  explanations  for  the 
readers  of  the  translation. 

In  short,  we  seem  compelled  to  look  beyond  the 
translator  for  a  key  to  the  facts  which  the  Book  of 
Jeremiah  presents.  As  soon  as  we  do  this  and  recall 
how  some  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament  at  least  was 
translated  into  Greek  previous  to  the  gathering  of  the 


112  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

prophetic  writings  into  a  single  collection  about  200  B.C., 
there  is  offered  as  an  explanation  of  the  facts  in  hand 
the  probability  that  the  Septuagint  of  Jeremiah  was 
translated  from  an  earlier  and  briefer  edition  of  the 
book  than  the  Hebrew  we  now  have.  In  other  words, 
the  simplest  explanation  of  the  differences  between  the 
Septuagint  and  the  Hebrew  Jeremiah  is  to  think  that 
the  process  of  growth  through  which  the  book  began  to 
pass  from  the  time  of  the  prophet  himself  continued  after 
the  Septuagint  translation  was  produced,  and  that  the 
later  revisers  and  editors  of  the  Hebrew  work  recon- 
structed and  enlarged  its  contents.  This  is  a  simple 
method  of  understanding  the  growth  of  the  Book  of 
Jeremiah,  and  it  is  in  harmony  with  the  evidences  of 
growth  of  the  entire  Old  Testament,  as  we  have  observed 
these  evidences,  which  appear  from  the  literature  itself. 

The  experiences  through  which  the  Book  of  Daniel 
has  passed  are  perhaps  as  suggestive  as  those  of  Jere- 
miah. Space  need  not  be  taken  here,  however,  to  ex- 
hibit details.  These  would  merely  impress  once  more 
the  free  handling  which  the  Old  Testament  received 
among  the  Greek-speaking  Jews  in  Egypt  and  the  con- 
tinued editorial  activities  of  the  Hebrew  scribes  them- 
selves. 

In  this  chapter  thus  far  I  have  pointed  out  chiefly  the 
relation  of  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek  to  the  Hebrew, 
from  which  most  of  it  was  translated,  and  the  natural- 
ness with  which  the  Greek  included  various  writings  in 
addition  to  those  contained  in  the  Hebrew.  This  is 
worth  while  for  its  own  sake.  Those  who  wish  to  be  in- 
formed concerning  the  Bible  need  to  be  conversant  with 
such  facts  because  of  their  own  value.     It  would  be  un- 


HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  GREEK     113 

just  to  the  modern  student  of  the  Bible  if  the  facts  were 
obscured. 

The  material  which  has  been  presented  has  a  more 
important  service,  however,  than  merely  to  sketch  the 
course  of  Hterary  movements  which  resulted  in  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Septuagint.  That  larger  service  is  to  furnish 
a  point  of  contact  between  the  Old  Testament  and 
early  Christianity,  between  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
New  Testament,  and  between  the  Hebrew  Old  Testa- 
ment and  some  of  the  Christian  versions,  particularly 
the  Douay,  or  Roman  Catholic,  version.  We  shall  see 
this  in  more  detail  as  we  pass  on  to  the  succeeding 
chapters. 

Just  here,  however,  we  ought  to  recall  the  main 
reason  why  the  early  Christians  naturally  received  the 
old  Testament  in  Greek,  the  larger  collection  of  Jewish 
sacred  books,  instead  of  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the 
Writings  only.  This  reason  is  easily  seen  by  the  reader 
of  the  New  Testament.  On  nearly  every  page  he  finds 
reference  to  the  bitter  opposition  which  arose  between 
the  Israelitish  leaders  in  Palestine  and  those  who  be- 
came the  followers  of  Jesus.  There  was  such  opposi- 
tion, to  some  extent,  outside  of  Palestine,  in  Macedonia 
for  example,  as  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  chapters 
of  Acts  relate,  but  it  was  not  so  general  as  that  which 
Palestine  displayed. 

Out  in  the  Greek  world,  accordingly,  the  disciples 
of  Jesus  gained  their  permanent  and  most  important 
hold  upon  the  people.  Egypt  was  one  of  these  coun- 
tries where  Christianity  thus  established  itself.  Inter- 
estingly enough,  this  success  of  the  gospel  in  Egypt 
seems  to  have  been  without  serious  opposition.     The 


114  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

New  Testament  records  no  instance  of  hostility  to  the 
gospel  story.  On  the  contrary,  the  very  few  references 
to  Christian  activity  in  the  land  of  the  Nile  indicate  a 
favorable  attitude  toward  the  new  movement.  It  was 
to  Egypt  that  Joseph  and  Mary  went  as  a  means  of 
protecting  the  life  of  the  infant  Savior.  Among  those 
at  Jerusalem  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  who  listened  favor- 
ably to  the  preaching  of  the  apostles  were  visitors  from 
Egypt  and  the  North  African  district  of  Libya  farther 
west  (Acts  2:10). 

These  are  the  only  statements  in  the  New  Testament 
suggesting  how  the  gospel  was  carried  to  Egypt  and 
Northern  Africa  beyond.  And  yet  Northern  Africa  was 
early  one  of  the  fields  of  active  Christian  life  and  soon 
became  prominent  among  the  fields  of  Christian  influ- 
ence. We  look  for  an  explanation  of  these  facts.  We 
want  to  know  why  the  seemingly  slight  effort  to  sow  the 
seed  of  Christianity  in  Northeastern  Africa  bore  so  ex- 
cellent a  harvest.  An  explanation  may  be  found,  partly 
at  least,  in  the  liberal  attitude  of  mind  which  was  al- 
ready characteristic  of  the  people  in  Egypt  and  their 
neighbors. 

Thus  Egypt  and  other  portions  of  the  Greek  world 
accepted  Christianity,  and  the  Christianity  which 
spread  over  the  Greek  world  naturally  received  the  Old 
Testament  in  Greek  rather  than  the  Law,  the  Prophets, 
and  the  Writings.  The  acceptance  of  the  Law,  the 
Prophets,  and  the  Writings,  the  Scriptures  of  the  Jews, 
would  indeed  have  been  a  strange  event.  It  was  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  that  their  persecutors  from  Jerusalem 
accepted  and  exalted  above  all  else.  The  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures, unless  they  were  translated,  were  an  unknown 


HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  GREEK      115 

tongue.  For  Christians  to  ask  translation  of  them 
would  have  been  to  ask  food  at  the  hands  of  tormentors, 
when  religious  sustenance  was  already  their  own  posses- 
sion in  the  Scriptures  in  Greek. 

The  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Writings  therefore 
stood  for  the  time  as  the  sacred  books  of  the  Israelites 
alone.  The  early  Christians,  almost  without  exception, 
had  no  need  for  the  Hebrew  and  were  content  that  it 
should  belong  to  the  Jews  only.  A  few  of  those  who 
became  followers  of  Jesus  retained  their  devotion  to  the 
Hebrew.  Paul  was  one  of  these,  cherishing  the  ancient 
Hebrew  books  as  a  fountain  of  the  waters  of  life ;  but  even 
he  and  any  others  of  the  same  learning  and  type  of  mind 
must  have  used  the  Greek  in  their  ordinary  work,  for 
only  the  Greek  was  understood  by  the  majority  of  the 
people  to  whom  they  went.  And  the  translation  which 
they  used  was  the  Septuagint  or  other  Greek  versions 
of  the  Old  Testament. 

I  have  just  said,  "the  Septuagint  or  other  Greek  ver- 
sions." It  is  useful  to  know  that,  while  the  Septuagint 
was  the  ordinary  Greek  version  of  the  Old  Testament, 
it  did  not  remain  the  only  one.  Some  of  the  Septu- 
agint was  very  poor  Greek,  either  from  the  point  of 
view  of  literature  or  from  that  of  adequate  translation 
of  the  Hebrew  thought,  or  from  both  these  considera- 
tions. Also,  after  the  early  Christians  came  to  employ 
the  Septuagint  and  appeal  to  it,  Greek-speaking  Jews 
who  abhorred  Christianity  found  occasion  for  making 
further  translations  more  to  their  own  liking  and  with 
literary  qualities  that  they  regarded  as  of  a  higher  order. 
Thus  were  made  the  translations  bearing  the  name  of 
Aquila,  Theodotion  (both  of  the  second  century  a.d.). 


ii6  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

and  Symmachus  (of  the  third),  these  dates  indicating 
that  in  the  days  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles  only  the  Sep- 
tuagint  was  available  for  Greek-speaking  people  who 
were  interested  in  the  books  which  we  call  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. 

It  should  be  mentioned  also  that  some  of  the  books 
of  the  Septuagint  not  in  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament, 
especially  some  of  those  which  were  written  in  Greek, 
were  composed  later  than  the  latest  of  the  Writings. 
While  the  dates  of  these  various  books  are  quite  uncer- 
tain, some  of  them,  for  example  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon 
and  IV  Maccabees,  may  have  been  written  as  late  as 
about  the  time  of  the  birth  of  Jesus,  or  even  later.  This 
is  a  further  indication  that  the  Septuagint  was  a  slowly 
developed  collection  and  may  have  been  still  flexible  in 
its  contents  at  the  dawning  of  Christianity. 

Thus  we  see  the  contents  of  what  we  call  the 
Old  Testament  at  the  period  when  Jesus  carried  on  his 
ministry  and  when  the  books  of  the  New  Testament 
were  beginning  to  be  written.  Among  the  Jews  in 
Palestine  the  Old  Testament  consisted  of  the  Law,  the 
Prophets,  the  Psahns,  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  some  use 
of  the  remaining  books  of  the  Writings.  This  was  the 
practical  situation  at  least,  whether  the  Jewish  leaders 
had  definitely  come  to  such  a  conclusion  or  not. 

Among  the  Jews  outside  of  Palestine  there  was  no 
such  definiteness  of  scripture  content,  and  ordinarily  a 
larger  number  of  books  was  accepted.  The  Law,  the 
Prophets,  and  the  Writings  had  been  translated  into 
Greek.  The  process  of  translation  had  begun  some 
300  years  before  and  had  been  continued  as  occasion 
arose,   until  all   the  books  were  included.     The  later 


HEBREW  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  GREEK     117 

books,  particularly  the  Book  of  Daniel,  had  not  been 
given  a  Greek  version  until  well  along  in  the  second 
century  B.C.,  and  perhaps  not  until  the  first.  All  these 
translations,  at  any  rate  those  outside  the  Law,  were 
held  in  a  comparatively  flexible  condition  and  were  re- 
garded as  a  relatively  changeable  collection.  By  the 
side  of  these  books,  or  rather  mingled  with  them,  were 
various  other  writings,  some  of  them  originally  written 
in  Hebrew  and  later  translated  into  Greek,  and  others 
composed  in  Greek,  to  all  of  which  the  Greek-speaking 
Jews  gave  recognition  similar  to  that  which  they  gave 
to  the  books  translated  from  the  Hebrew. 


CHAPTER  X 
THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

The  story  of  the  growth  of  the  New  Testament 
obviously  cannot  be  told  with  any  detail  in  a  single 
chapter  of  a  volume  like  this,  or  even  in  a  much  larger 
essay.  Fortunately  there  is  no  occasion  to  undertake 
such  a  story.  For  those  who  desire  the  fuller  account 
there  are  already  numerous  books  which  may  be  used 
for  the  purpose,  and  the  dictionaries  of  the  Bible  have 
abundant  material  of  like  sort.  The  purpose  of  this 
chapter  is  quite  different.  It  endeavors  only  to  sketch 
the  origin  and  development  of  the  different  writings 
included  in  the  New  Testament,  to  indicate  their  re- 
lation to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and,  in  doing 
both  of  these  things,  to  pave  the  way  for  understanding 
how  the  versions  of  the  entire  Bible  came  into  existence. 
In  a  word,  the  purpose  here  is  to  show  the  relation  of 
the  New  Testament  to  the  growth  of  the  Bible  as  a 
whole. 

While  the  story  of  the  gospel  and  of  Christianity 
began  with  the  work  of  Jesus,  the  New  Testament  as 
separate  books,  and  especially  as  a  collection  of  writings, 
had  its  origin  some  years  later.  It  is  so  because  Jesus 
did  not  write  books,  or  at  least  wrote  nothing  which  has 
been  preserved.  This  does  not  mean,  of  course,  that 
Jesus  could  not  write ;  such  passages  as  John  8 : 6-8  and 
Luke  4 :  16-19  indicate  that  he  wrote  when  he  wished,  and 
that  he  was  accustomed  to  read  the  Jewish  Scriptures. 

118 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        119 

He  merely  chose  oral  rather  than  written  messages  as 
means  of  introducing  the  good  news. 

The  companions  of  Jesus  and  his  later  followers 
used  the  written  page  as  deliberately  as  he  had  preferred 
the  spoken  word.  Yet  we  are  not  informed  as  to  how 
early  they  did  this.  Some  of  them  may  have  written 
out,  while  he  spoke,  brief  reports  of  his  teaching,  but 
we  do  not  know  that  they  did.  It  was  not  strange  if 
they  did  not,  for  they  already  possessed  the  Jewish 
Scriptures,  to  which  he  constantly  appealed  as  the  basis 
of  what  he  said,  and  it  was  natural  that  they  were  con- 
tented, while  he  was  with  them,  with  the  Scriptures 
already  in  hand. 

When  Jesus  was  taken  from  them,  however,  they 
began  to  desire  written  copies  of  what  he  had  said,  both 
for  their  own  satisfaction  and  for  use  in  repeating  his 
message  to  others.  The  New  Testament  itself  furnishes 
valuable  information  concerning  this  fact.  We  find 
it  in  the  first  four  verses  of  the  Third  Gospel.  These 
verses  are  far  too  little  known  and  read,  and  it  is  worth 
while  to  reproduce  them  here  in  full. 

Luke  1:1-4 

Forasmuch  as  many  have  taken  in  hand  to  draw  up  a  narrative 
concerning  those  matters  which  have  been  fulfilled  among  us, 
even  as  they  deUvered  them  unto  us,  who  from  the  beginning 
were  eyewitnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word,  it  seemed  good  to 
me  also,  having  traced  the  course  of  all  things  accurately  from  the 
first,  to  write  unto  thee  in  order,  most  excellent  Theophilus; 
that  thou  mightest  know  the  certainty  concerning  the  things 
wherein  thou  was  instructed. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  language  is  highly  suggestive.' 
The  marginal  rendering  of  the  last  four  words  is  even 


I20  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

more  informing  than  the  words  themselves.  The  margin 
reads,  "which  thou  was  taught  by  word  of  mouth." 
This  undoubtedly  brings  out  the  meaning  of  the  Greek. 
It  calls  attention  to  the  oral  message  which  was  still 
received  by  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  At  the  same  time  it 
is  a  reminder  of  the  need  of  verifying  that  oral  message 
by  the  written  accounts  of  Jesus  and  his  work.  Of  these 
written  accounts  the  writer  of  our  Third  Gospel  would 
make  his  own  account  most  important,  and  Theophilus 
is  exhorted  to  study  it  carefully. 

The  language  quoted  shows  that  already  several  nar- 
ratives concerning  the  hfe  and  work  of  Jesus  had  been 
written.  "Several"  puts  the  matter  very  conserva- 
tively, for  the  Greek,  as  clearly  as  the  English,  reads 
"many."  Interpreting  that  word  in  its  most  conserva- 
tive sense,  however,  we  cannot  make  it  mean  less  than 
"several."  Accordingly,  at  the  time  in  which  our  Third 
Gospel  was  compiled,  the  author  knew  of  several  at- 
tempts of  a  similar  sort,  several  sketches  of  the  hfe  and 
work  of  Jesus.  What  does  this  mean  when  taken  with 
the  fact  that  we  have  only  four  Gospels  ? 

First,  it  means,  clearly  enough,  that  the  "many"  did 
not  include  our  Third  Gospel;  there  were  "many"  before 
that  was  compiled.  Secondly,  the  "many"  did  not  in- 
clude our  Fourth  Gospel,  for  all  students  of  the  Gospels 
are  agreed  that  our  Fourth  Gospel  was  written  later 
than  the  other  three.  Of  the  "many"  then  we  have 
in  our  New  Testament  only  two  at  the  most;  and  pos- 
sibly we  have  only  one,  Mark,  for  it  is  not  at  all  certain 
that  Matthew  is  earher  than  Luke,  or  that  the  writer 
of  Luke  was  acquainted  with  Matthew.  Altogether, 
before  the  writing  of  our  Third  Gospel,  there  had  ap- 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        121 

peared  a  considerable  number  of  accounts  of  the  min- 
istry of  Jesus,  all  but  two  of  which,  and  possibly  all  but 
one  of  which,  have  ceased  to  exist,  at  least  in  the  forms 
in  which  they  were  then  known;  but  this  reference  to 
them  in  the  Preface  to  Luke  tells  us  how  early  the 
followers  of  Jesus  were  eager  to  possess  written  stories 
of  his  career. 

The  reader  has  observed  how  I  have  spoken  of  the 
Third  Gospel  as  a  compilation.  There  is  evidently  no 
occasion  to  urge  that  it  is  such;  the  writer  knew  of 
various  previous  narratives,  was  not  satisfied  with  them, 
and  made  use  of  them  and  of  further  investigations 
to  produce  a  better  account.  The  language  of  the  Pref- 
ace leaves  little  doubt  on  that  point,  and  certainty 
might  be  secured  in  other  ways,  if  our  purpose  led 
in  those  directions.  For  the  present  it  does  not,  and  I 
call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Gospel  is  a  compilation 
only  to  ask  the  reader  to  consider  this  in  connection  with 
what  has  been  found  to  be  the  origin  and  form  of  growth 
of  the  Old  Testament  writings.  Apparently  the  methods 
of  the  earlier  days  were  still  employed,  and  we  surely 
need  not  be  surprised  that  such  was  the  case. 

It  is  easily  seen  from  all  the  foregoing  that  consider- 
able time  had  elapsed  between  the  death  of  Jesus  and 
the  preparation  of  our  Third  Gospel.  The  fact  of  the 
production  of  several  narratives  of  his  life  makes  that 
certain,  for  they  would  hardly  have  all  appeared  at  once. 
The  passing  of  a  period  of  some  length  is  more  specifi- 
cally indicated  by  one  part  of  the  Luke  Preface.  I 
refer  to  the  words  "as  they  delivered  them  unto  us, 
who  from  the  beginning  were  eyewitnesses  and  ministers 
of  the  word."     Thus  the  writer  of  the  Gospel  tells  us 


122  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

that  he  was  not  acquainted  with  Jesus  personally,  and 
that  he  belonged  to  the  second  generation  of  Christians. 
We  see  then  that  he  was  writing  at  the  close  of  one  gener- 
ation at  least  after  the  days  of  Jesus. 

No  one  of  the  other  three  Gospels  provides  such  defi- 
nite information  concerning  its  origin  as  that  which  we 
have  found  at  the  beginning  of  Luke.  Still,  it  would 
be  possible  by  examination  of  the  language  of  the  others 
to  discover  something  of  the  manner  of  their  develop- 
ment. To  do  so  might  be  attractive,  but  the  purpose 
of  this  study  is  not  chiefly  an  analysis  of  the  scripture 
material.  Our  intention  is  rather  to  select  material 
which  is  particularly  illustrative  of  the  scripture  growth. 
What  we  have  observed  in  Luke  accomplishes  that  pur- 
pose for  the  Gospels,  and  further  details  may  be  found 
in  books  especially  devoted  to  the  presentation  of  ana- 
lytical study.  Here  it  is  sufficient  to  indicate  the  present 
outcome  of  gospel  study  concerning  the  authorship  and 
dates  of  the  four  accounts  of  Jesus'  life  and  service  which 
have  been  preserved  for  us. 

Accordingly  we  have  reason  for  assurance  that  the 
second  of  our  Gospels,  Mark,  was  the  first  of  the  four 
to  be  written.  It  was  probably  composed  as  early 
as  about  the  year  70.  Matthew  and  Luke  followed, 
perhaps  in  that  order,  and  may  very  probably  have 
been  written  as  early  as  the  year  80,  possibly  earlier. 
Matthew,  like  Luke,  is  a  compilation  of  previous  sources 
rather  than  the  independent  work  of  a  single  author. 
These  three  Gospels  together  are  called  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  that  is,  the  Gospels  which  present  a  common 
view  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  Every  reader  of  the  New 
Testament,  especially  every  Sunday-school  teacher  or 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT         123 

advanced  Sunday-school  scholar  who  has  attempted 
careful  study  of  the  Gospels  and  has  used  one  of  the  so- 
called  harmonies  of  the  Gospels,  is  already  aware  how 
manifest  is  that  common  view  of  Jesus  in  the  first  three 
gospel  narratives.  That  common  view  itself  easily  sug- 
gests that  the  three  Gospels  have  some  close  relationship, 
either  that  they  arose  from  the  use  of  common  sources, 
or  that  the  later  ones,  Matthew  and  Luke,  are  both  de- 
pendent on  Mark,  their  compilers  using  other  sources 
in  addition  to  our  Second  Gospel. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  is  considerably  later  than  Mat- 
thew and  Luke  and,  like  them,  may  be  the  work  of  more 
than  one  writer,  having  passed  through  editorial  revision, 
even  though  most  of  it  came  from  the  apostle  John, 
or  from  the  presbyter  of  Asia  Minor  of  the  same  name, 
both  views  having  earnest  advocates.  In  any  case  the 
composition  of  this  Gospel  was  not  much  earlier  than 
the  year  100  a.d.,  and  it  may  have  been  some  years 
later. 

The  Book  of  Acts  is  closely  connected  with  the  Third 
Gospel.  A  comparison  of  the  Preface  of  the  Gospel 
with  the  opening  sentence  of  Acts  makes  this  relation 
evident.  As  the  author  of  the  Gospel  used  the  work 
of  previous  writers  as  well  as  the  results  of  his  own  care- 
ful investigation  for  the  first  treatise,  we  may  expect 
that  he  employed  a  similar  method  in  the  Acts.  There 
is  no  doubt  that  the  book  shows  such  a  method.  A 
simple  way  in  which  to  be  assured  of  this  is  to  notice 
that  the  earher  portions  of  the  book,  up  to  16:10,  are 
written  in  the  third  person,  when  abruptly  the  narrative 
changes  to  the  first  person,  "We  sought  to  go  forth  into 
Macedonia,  concluding  that  God  had  called  us  to  preach 


124  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

the  gospel  unto  them";  and  later  the  third  person  is 
resumed.  The  date  of  composition  would  naturally  be 
a  little  later  than  that  of  the  Third  Gospel;  how  much 
later  we  are  unable  to  say. 

As  a  generation  or  so  passed  after  the  death  of  Jesus 
before  the  Gospels  and  the  Book  of  Acts  were  written, 
it  is  quite  possible  that  some  of  the  New  Testament 
writings  were  penned  earlier  than  the  Gospels.  Paul 
was  not  only  the  greatest  of  the  early  missionaries,  but 
also  the  one  who  left  more  written  accounts  of  his 
labors  than  did  any  of  his  fellow-workers.  It  is  appro- 
priate, therefore,  to  examine  his  letters  in  order  to  dis- 
cover as  well  as  we  can  in  a  brief  space  how  they  came 
to  be  written,  when  they  were  composed,  and  something 
of  the  experiences  through  which  they  passed  in  be- 
coming a  large  part  of  the  New  Testament. 

A  promising  place  at  which  to  begin  is  Paul's  state- 
ment in  I  Cor.  5:9-10:  "I  wrote  unto  you  in  my  epistle 
to  have  no  company  with  fornicators;  not  at  all  meaning 
with  the  fornicators  of  this  world,"  etc.  We  first  observe 
that  while  this  statement  is  in  what  we  call  I  Corinthians, 
Paul  refers  to  a  previous  letter  which  he  had  written  to 
Corinth.  Accordingly  our  I  Corinthians  must  be  at 
least  the  second  of  letters  that  Paul  wrote  to  those 
Christians. 

Paul  mentions  also  one  of  the  important  topics  which 
he  had  discussed  in  that  previous  letter,  the  subject 
of  fornication;  not,  however,  fornication  in  the  physical 
sense  but  in  the  spiritual  sense.  Now,  interestingly 
enough,  there  is  in  our  II  Corinthians  (6:14 — 7:1) 
the  following  passage  dealing  with  precisely  the  question 
Paul  refers  to  in  I  Cor.  5:9-10. 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        125 

Be  not  unequally  yoked  with  unbelievers:  for  what  fellowship 
have  righteousness  and  iniquity  ?  or  what  communion  hath  light 
with  darkness  ?  And  what  concord  hath  Christ  with  Belial  ?  or 
what  portion  hath  a  behever  with  an  unbehever?  And  what 
agreement  hath  a  temple  of  God  with  idols  ?  for  we  are  a  temple 
of  the  living  God;  even  as  God  said,  I  will  dwell  in  them,  and 
walk  in  them;  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  my 
people.     Wherefore 

Come  ye  out  from  among  them, 

and  be  ye  separate, 
saith  the  Lord, 

And  touch  no  unclean  thing; 

And  I  will  receive  you. 

And  will  be  to  you  a  Father, 

And  ye  shall  be  to  me  sons  and  daughters, 
saith    the   Lord   Almighty.     Having   therefore    these   promises, 
beloved,  let  us  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  defilement  of  flesh  and 
spirit,  perfecting  holiness  in  the  fear  of  God. 

The  reader  will  observe  that  in  thought  and  language 
this  passage  may  very  well  be  the  one  to  which  Paul 
refers  in  I  Cor.  5:9-10. 

There  is  another  element  in  the  situation  which  we 
need  to  notice.  This  is  that  the  preceding  passage 
breaks  the  connection  between  II  Cor.  6:13  and  7:2. 
That  there  may  be  no  uncertainty  about  this  I  bring 
the  separated  verses  together. 

n  CoR.  6:11-13  Followed  by  7:2-3 

Our  mouth  is  open  unto  you,  O  Corinthians,  our  heart  is 
enlarged.  Ye  are  not  straitened  in  us,  but  ye  are  straitened  in 
your  own  affections.  Now  for  a  recompense  in  like  kind  (I 
speak  as  unto  my  children),  be  ye  also  enlarged.  Open  your 
hearts  to  us:  we  wronged  no  man,  we  corrupted  no  man,  we  took 
advantage  of  no  man.  I  say  it  not  to  condemn  you:  for  I  have 
said  before,  that  ye  are  in  our  hearts  to  die  together  and  Hve  to- 
gether. 


126  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

The  reader  will  probably  find  it  impossible  to  say  where 
6 :  13  ends  and  7 : 2  begins,  unless  he  knows  the  passage 
by  heart,  or  opens  his  Bible  to  assure  himself. 

What  then  is  the  explanation  of  the  facts  before  us  ? 
Let  us  see  what  some  of  the  possibilities  are. 

We  know  that  it  was  the  custom  in  those  days  to 
copy  letters  on  papyrus  leaves.  One  such  leaf  would 
just  about  have  sufficed  for  the  passage  in  our  II  Cor. 
6:14 — 7:1.  In  the  hands  of  a  careless  copyist  such  a 
leaf  might  easily  have  slipped  out  of  the  letter  to  which 
it  belonged  and  then  have  found  place  among  the  leaves 
containing  our  II  Corinthians.  Once  in  there,  the  copy- 
ist would  easily  (cf,  the  statement  of  Jerome  quoted  on 
p.  148)  have  assumed  it  to  be  a  part  of  II  Corinthians 
and  copied  it  as  that  when  the  next  copy  was  made, 
just  as  though  it  were  a  part  of  the  letter  with  which  it 
chanced  to  be. 

One  is  more  inclined  to  accept  such  an  explanation  of 
the  placing  of  II  Cor.  6: 14 — 7:  i  because  of  other  mate- 
rial which  a  study  of  II  Corinthians  offers.  This  other 
material  is  hardly  as  easy  to  present  as  that  already 
introduced,  but  perhaps  it  may  be  sketched  sufficiently 
for  its  significance  to  be  weighed. 

If  one  reads  thoughtfully  through  all  of  II  Corinthians 
at  a  single  sitting  he  can  hardly  fail  to  receive  two  dis- 
tinct impressions.  In  the  first  six  or  seven  chapters 
he  feels  that  Paul  was  happy  and  wrote  with  confidence 
and  joy.  In  the  reading  of  chapters  10  to  13  inclusive, 
however,  there  is  certain  to  be  an  equally  definite  impres- 
sion that  Paul  was  writing  in  sadness  and  pain,  with  a 
consciousness  that  he  must  assert  his  apostolic  authority, 
and   having   in   mind   an   individual   offender   against 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT         127 

Christian  proprieties.  And  if  the  reader  will  now  re-read 
the  earlier  chapters,  particularly  2:1-11,  he  may  natu- 
rally feel  that  these  verses  refer  to  the  repentance  of  such 
an  offender  and  convey  the  full  forgiveness  which  Paul 
himself  shows  and  desires  that  those  in  Corinth  likewise 
shall  display. 

In  that  second  chapter  the  reader  will  discover  also 
that  Paul  refers  to  a  letter  which  he  had  written  with 
sorrow  and  pain  (vss.  3  and  4).  Hear  what  the  apostle 
says: 

And  I  wrote  this  very  thing,  lest,  when  I  came,  I  should 
have  sorrow  from  them  of  whom  I  ought  to  rejoice;  having 
confidence  in  you  all,  that  my  joy  is  the  joy  of  you  all.  For 
out  of  much  affliction  and  anguish  of  heart  I  wrote  unto  you 
with  many  tears;  not  that  ye  should  be  made  sorry,  but  that 
ye  might  know  the  love  which  I  have  more  abundantly  unto 
you. 

Is  this  a  reference  to  the  manifestly  painful  portion  of 
our  II  Corinthians,  that  is,  chapters  10  to  13  inclusive? 
At  the  least  those  chapters  present  just  the  sort  of  mate- 
rial that  the  reference  requires.  It  is  entirely  possible 
then  that  the  last  four  chapters  of  II  Corinthians  are 
the  letter  of  which  Paul  speaks  in  II  Cor.  2 : 3-4.  Taking 
the  evidence  altogether  as  it  stands,  we  most  naturally 
conclude  that  chapters  10  to  13  are  part  or  all  of  the 
letter  mentioned  in  II  Cor,  2:3-4. 

Some  inferences  are  entirely  clear.  Since  Paul  in 
I  Cor.  5 : 9  refers  to  an  earlier  letter,  he  must  have  written 
one  previous  to  our  I  Corinthians,  and  I  Corinthians 
was  at  least  the  second  letter  he  addressed  to  these 
Christians.  Also,  since  I  Corinthians  is  evidently  not 
the  painful  letter  mentioned  in  II  Cor.  2:3-4,  there  must 


128  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

have  been  a  letter  between  I  Corinthians  and  the  begin- 
ning of  II  Corinthians.  Altogether,  we  are  certain 
that  Paul  wrote  at  least  four  letters  to  the  Corinthian 
Christians.  If  he  wrote  two  letters  just  as  the  two  stand 
which  we  have,  then  two  others  are  entirely  lost.  This 
is  quite  possible.  At  the  same  time,  in  view  of  the  inter- 
est which  the  Corinthians  manifestly  took  to  preserve 
what  Paul  wrote  them — otherwise  none  of  his  letters 
would  have  come  to  us — together  with  what  has  appeared 
from  our  study,  it  seems  more  probable  that  we  have  in 
II  Cor.  6: 14 — 7 :  i  a  small  portion  of  the  letter  mentioned 
in  I  Cor.  5:9,  that  our  I  Corinthians  is  a  second  letter, 
that  II  Cor.  10:1 — 13:14  is  most  of  the  painful  letter 
mentioned  in  II  Cor.  2:3-4,  and  so  a  third  letter,  and 
that  the  first  nine  chapters  of  II  Corinthians  are  what 
remains,  if  not  all,  of  a  fourth  letter  sent  by  the  apostle 
to  the  Christians  in  Corinth.  It  should  be  added  that 
by  further  analysis  of  our  two  letters  it  is  possible  to 
find  traces  of  a  fifth  letter,  and  chapter  9,  or  chapters  8 
and  9  together  of  II  Corinthians  are  sometimes  regarded 
as  remains  of  such  a  letter. 

I  have  already  indicated  how  a  fragment  of  the  first 
of  four  letters  might  very  easily  have  become  incorpo- 
rated in  another  letter,  that  which  we  call  II  Corinthians. 
The  present  arrangement  of  that  letter  as  composed 
chiefly  of  portions  of  two  letters  is  likewise  not  at  all 
strange.  For  obvious  reasons  the  letter  of  gladness 
and  consolation  would  be  more  highly  regarded  than  the 
painful  one.  Also  the  occasion  of  the  painful  letter  was 
such  that  any  extended  greeting  was  out  of  place,  an 
abrupt  beginning  such  as  we  find  at  the  opening  of 
chapter    10   being  what  we   should   expect.     Further, 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        129 

this  painful  letter  was  probably  comparatively  short. 
Of  course  there  was  no  particular  occasion  for  those  who 
cherished  the  letters  on  account  of  their  contents  to 
be  concerned  in  a  chronological  arrangement.  Accord- 
ingly it  is  not  only  possible,  but  perhaps  even  probable, 
that  in  the  assembling  of  letters  from  Paul  the  com- 
forting letter  should  have  been  given  preference  over  the 
letter  bearing  sadness  of  thought,  and  that  the  sad  letter, 
being  without  any  special  greeting,  should  have  been 
attached  to  it.  If  the  present  form  of  II  Corinthians 
did  not  need  an  explanation  of  its  arrangement,  we 
should  not  think  of  one.  With  an  explanation  as  a 
permanent  challenge,  and  with  so  easy  and  natural 
an  explanation  at  hand  in  the  material  itself,  we 
are  likely  to  accept  it.  In  doing  so  we  are  only  dis- 
covering once  more  how  the  biblical  writings  as  they 
have  come  to  us  are  the  outgrowth  of  processes  of 
compilation. 

The  close  of  the  letter  to  the  Romans,  that  is,  from 
the  concluding  verses  of  chapter  14  on,  offers  another 
attractive  study  in  the  handling  of  the  Pauline  writings. 
One  may  see  this  from  merely  giving  attention  to  the 
marginal  notes  of  those  chapters  in  the  Revised  Version. 
It  is  well  to  examine  them  in  connection  with  the  read- 
ing of  this  discussion.  From  such  an  examination  it  is 
evident  that  the  ancient  manuscripts  furnish  a  variety 
of  endings  to  the  letter.  In  fact,  those  early  authorities, 
including  the  quotations  from  the  letter  made  by  Chris- 
tian writers  of  the  second  century,  for  example  Origen, 
and  his  remarks  about  the  ending  of  the  letter,  disclose 
even  greater  early  variations  than  the  marginal  notes 
of  the  Revised  Version  indicate. 


I30  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

With  these  facts  in  mind  we  turn  to  the  letter  itself 
and  note  how  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  chapter  is  a 
benediction  and  apparently  the  close  of  the  letter  to 
which  it  belongs.  Also  the  first  verse  of  chapter  i6 
reads  like  the  beginning  of  a  letter,  as  though  the  writer 
is  introducing  Phoebe,  the  bearer  of  the  letter,  to  those 
who  are  to  receive  it  from  her.  The  passage  is  worth 
reproducing  here: 

Rom.  15:33  Followed  by  16:1 

Now  the  God  of  peace  be  with  you  all.     Amen. 
I  commend  unto  you  Phoebe  our  sister,  who  is  a  servant  of 
the  church  that  is  at  Cenchreae: 

These  sentences  side  by  side  in  a  single  letter  would  be 
a  very  unusual  arrangement. 

The  contents  of  the  sixteenth  chapter  are  equally 
suggestive  for  our  study,  particularly  verses  3  to  15 
inclusive.  They  should  be  read  through  carefully. 
This  reading  will  show  a  long  list  of  greetings  for  Paul's 
friends  who  live  at  the  destination  of  the  letter.  Unfor- 
tunately only  two  of  these  friends,  Prisca  and  Aquila, 
are  elsewhere  referred  to  with  certainty;  the  Rufus 
mentioned  (vs.  13)  might  be  the  same  as  the  one  of  Mark 
15:21,  but  if  so  we  should  not  gain  any  particular  aid. 
Prisca  and  Aquila,  however,  are  highly  suggestive.  Not 
long  before  Paul  was  writing  to  the  Christians  at  Rome, 
Aquila  and  Priscilla  (Priscilla  is  another  spelling  of 
Prisca)  had  been  driven  from  Rome  and  were  in  Corinth 
(Acts  18:1-3);  from  there  they  went  on  to  Ephesus 
(Acts  18:18-19).  They  remained  at  Ephesus  and  had 
a  home  there  when  Paul  was  writing  our  I  Corinthians 
(I  Cor.   16:19);    3,nd  at  a  later  period  they  seem  to 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        131 

have  been  there  still  (II  Tim.  4:19).  The  sixteenth 
chapter  of  Romans  accordingly  appears  not  to  be  ad- 
dressed to  Christians  at  Rome  but  to  Christians  at 
Ephesus. 

The  details  of  the  questions  raised  must  be  left  to 
the  larger  works  on  the  history  of  the  New  Testament. 
It  is  sufficient  here  to  recognize  that  the  last  part  of 
the  letter  to  the  Romans,  as  soon  as  it  is  sympathetically 
examined,  discloses,  like  II  Corinthians,  a  combination 
of  originally  separate  writings  of  Paul,  the  combination 
having  been  made  by  those  who  were  more  interested 
in  preserving  the  helpful  messages  received  from  the 
great  apostle  than  in  combining  them  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  show  the  geographical  relations  of  the  different 
letters. 

We  may  now  turn  to  the  letter  to  the  Philippians, 
particularly  the  fourth  chapter.  Especially  from  the 
tenth  verse  on  Paul  rejoices  in  the  assistance  and  com- 
fort he  had  received  from  his  Philippian  friends,  and  he 
takes  occasion  to  refer  to  earlier  aid  of  a  similar  sort 
(vss.  15-16).     He  says: 

And  ye  yourselves  also  know,  ye  Philippians,  that  in  the 
beginning  of  the  gospel,  when  I  departed  from  Macedonia,  no 
church  had  fellowship  with  me  in  the  matter  of  giving  and  receiv- 
ing but  ye  only;  for  even  in  Thessalonica  ye  sent  once  and  again 
unto  my  need. 

Acts  16:11 — 17:15  should  be  read  in  this  connection. 
Whether  this  is  done  or  not,  what  did  Paul  mean  by 
reminding  the  Philippians  not  only  of  giving  to  meet 
his  needs  but  also  of  "receiving"  from  him  ?  What  had 
they  received  from  him  ?  Evidently  not  material 
contribution  of  money  or  something  else,  for  they  did 


132  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

not  need  it,  and  he  was  not  so  situated  as  to  be  able  to 
offer  it.  Had  Paul  sent  them  merely  an  oral  message 
as  Epaphroditus  (vs.  i8),  the  bearer  of  their  gifts, 
returned  home  ?  That  is  possible,  but,  in  view  of  what 
we  know  of  Paul,  is  it  at  all  probable  ?  Would  he  not 
have  been  far  more  likely  to  send,  on  each  of  the  two 
or  more  occasions  mentioned,  a  letter  of  gratitude, 
commendation,  and  encouragement?  There  is  little 
doubt  that  he  did  so.  His  language  is  a  delicate  way 
of  recalling  for  them  the  messages  he  had  sent  and  very 
likely  the  assurances  he  had  received  from  them  in 
return  for  the  help  he  had  given. 

Our  letter  to  the  Philippians  then  indicates  that  it  is 
all  that  remains  of  a  somewhat  extended  correspondence 
between  Paul  and  the  Christians  at  Philippi;  and  such 
a  correspondence  was  perfectly  natural.  One  sees 
this  as  soon  as  he  pictures  himself  back  in  the  situation 
and  thinks  of  what  Paul  and  his  friends  would  be  inclined 
to  do. 

It  is  possible  to  find  in  the  letters  to  Timothy  and 
Titus,  and  to  a  less  extent  in  some  of  the  other  Pauline 
letters,  evidence  of  compilations  and  editing,  as  we  have 
found  such  evidence  in  II  Corinthians  and  Romans. 
The  analysis  is  less  manifest,  however,  at  least  to  the 
reader  of  the  English  versions,  and  I  shall  not  endeavor 
to  present  the  material  here.  We  already  have  before 
us  suflEicient  to  show  something  of  the  experiences  through 
which  the  writings  of  Paul  passed  in  coming  to  the  forms 
which  we  have  inherited.  Very  likely  we  have  the  most 
important  of  Paul's  letters,  at  least  those  which  to  the 
early  Christians  were  of  most  interest  and  value.  That 
we  have  lost  considerable  is  equally  clear,  and  it  is  not 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        133 

at  all  outside  of  possibility,  or  perhaps  probability,  that 
the  letters  which  have  come  to  us  are  merely  a  fraction, 
a  major  fraction  at  the  most,  of  all  that  the  great  apostle 
either  dictated  or  personally  wrote  (cf.  Gal.  6:11),  as 
he  went  from  place  to  place,  received  gifts  and  messages 
from  his  friends,  and  responded  in  the  generous  spirit 
which  his  entire  career  displays. 

We  are  now  in  a  better  position  to  think  of  the  places 
from  which  Paul  wrote  and  of  the  times  when  his  mes- 
sages were  composed.  I  attempt  only  to  sketch  the  tend- 
ency of  opinion  to  which  a  study  of  the  material  leads. 
Accordingly  Galatians  may  be  the  earhest  of  Paul's 
letters  which  we  have,  and  he  probably  wrote  it  at 
Antioch  in  Syria,  perhaps  as  early  as  the  year  52  or 
53.  Then  follow  the  two  letters  to  the  Thessalonians, 
sent  from  Athens  or  Corinth,  perhaps  in  54  or  55  (cf. 
Acts  17:14 — 18:17).  Possibly  only  a  few  months  or  a 
year  later  (Acts  19:  i — 20: 2),  while  Paul  was  in  Ephesus 
and  Macedonia,  the  letters  to  the  Corinthians  were 
written.  Apparently  on  this  journey,  which  took  him 
to  Greece  and  the  city  of  Corinth  (Acts  20:1-3),  he 
wrote  to  the  Romans.  Whether  the  close  of  the  letter 
as  it  now  stands,  especially  the  sixteenth  chapter  as 
greetings  to  the  friends  in  Ephesus,  was  composed  then 
we  cannot  say.  Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians, 
and  Philemon,  the  so-called  letters  from  Paul's  imprison- 
ment, written  from  Rome  (or,  as  some  think,  from  Cae- 
sarea),  may  have  been  sent  before  the  year  60.  The 
letters  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  the  so-called  pastoral 
epistles,  are  a  little  later.  Their  dates  depend  on  whether 
Paul  was  released  from  prison  and  made  another  mission- 
ary journey,  at  the  close  of  which  he  was  again  in  prison 


134  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

in  Rome  and  wrote  the  pastorals,  or  at  least  wrote  the 
letters  from  fragments  of  which  the  pastorals  as  we  have 
them  were  compiled.  The  entire  matter  of  these  dates 
is  quite  uncertain,  and  its  consideration  includes  the 
question  of  whether  Paul  suffered  martyrdom  as  early 
as  the  year  60  (or  possibly  earlier)  or  not  until  several 
years  after  that. 

By  comparing  these  dates  for  Paul's  letters  with 
what  has  been  said  above  concerning  the  dates  of  com- 
position of  the  Gospels,  it  will  be  seen  that  probably 
all  of  Paul's  writings  were  earlier  than  the  earliest  of  our 
present  Gospels.  The  apostle  may  have  paid  for  this 
fidehty  to  Jesus  with  death  before  even  our  Gospel  of 
Mark  was  penned.  The  Gospels  were  placed  first 
among  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  of  course, 
both  because  they  describe  the  work  of  Jesus,  the 
master  of  Paul,  and  because  the  material  they  con- 
tain deals  with  the  beginning  of  the  gospel  story  as  a 
whole. 

I  have  said  nothing  about  the  letter  to  the  Hebrews 
as  a  writing  from  Paul.  Differing  about  this  letter  in 
so  many  respects.  New  Testament  students  are  pretty 
well  agreed  on  one  point,  namely,  that  the  letter  was 
not  written  by  Paul.-  As  to  who  did  write  it  there  is 
no  generally  accepted  answer.  The  names  of  Mark, 
Luke,  Priscilla,  Aquila,  Barnabas,  Apollos,  have  all 
been  proposed,  but  no  one  knows  or  is  likely  to  dis- 
cover with  certainty  who  the  author  was.  The  letter 
was  probably  written  within  a  few  years  after  Paul's 
death. 

There  remain  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  to 
be  considered  the  so-called  general  epistles  of  James, 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        135 

Peter,  John,  and  Jude,  and  finally  the  Apocalypse,  or, 
as  the  name  appears  in  the  ordinary  English  Bible, 
the  Revelation  of  John.  Each  of  these  books  raises 
questions  which  students  have  followed  out  in  detail. 
It  is  not  needful  here  either  to  repeat  the  essentials  of 
those  treatises  or  to  examine  at  length  the  language 
of  the  writings.  The  marks  of  authorship  or  composition 
are  not  so  evident  as  we  could  wish. 

Some  items  concerning  these  books,  however,  are 
especially  worthy  of  mention  and  must  claim  attention 
for  a  moment.  While  James  has  often  been  regarded 
as  one  of  the  earliest,  perhaps  the  earliest,  of  the  New 
Testament  writings,  composed  as  early  as  the  year  50, 
the  letter  seems  to  bear  marks  of  much  later  authorship 
and  may  belong  among  the  later  writings.  The  letters 
bearing  the  name  of  Peter,  particularly  the  second  of  the 
two,  likewise  offer  material  which  suggests  later  compo- 
sition. The  authorship  and  date  of  the  letters  bearing 
the  name  of  John  are  manifestly  connected  with  the 
question  of  the  authorship  and  date  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  which  the  letters  so  much  resemble  in  style  and 
thought.  The  Epistle  of  Jude  attracts  notice  out  of 
proportion  to  its  extent  or  its  teaching  because  the  author 
quotes  (vss.  14-15)  from  the  apocalyptic  Book  of  Enoch 
and  otherwise  shows  familiarity  with  that  apocalyptic 
writing.  And  fmally  the  Book  of  Revelation,  which 
calls  itself  the  Apocalypse  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  (as 
mentioned  on  p.  94)  belongs  to  the  apocalyptic  type 
of  literature,  cannot  be  rightly  understood  unless  it 
is  studied  as  a  writing  of  that  class  of  composition. 
When  it  is  so  studied  the  question  of  authorship  loses 
its   importance,  other   than  as  a  matter  of  historical 


136  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

investigation,  and  the  date  is  to  be  gathered  from  the 
latest  historical  events  presented  with  some  deliniteness, 
though  symbolically,  in  the  book  itself.  Unfortunately 
the  events  mentioned  in  the  book  are  more  veiled  than 
those  in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  the  time  of  writing 
is  not  at  all  easy  to  discover.  Among  the  most  careful 
students  of  the  book,  therefore,  opinions  vary  between 
about  the  year  70  and  a  generation  or  so  later,  that  is, 
as  late  as  the  year  100.  Wrapped  up  with  this  difference 
of  opinion  as  to  date  is  the  question  whether  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  an  independent  work  of  one  writer  or  a  compila- 
tion of  different  apocalyptic  sources,  all  reworked  into 
the  marvelous  general  unity  which  anyone  feels  who 
reads  the  book  at  a  single  sitting. 

Altogether,  then,  the  order  of  composition  of  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament  is,  first,  the  writings  of 
Paul;  second,  the  Gospels,  Acts,  the  letter  to  the  Hebrews, 
and  possibly  the  Apocalypse,  the  individual  order  of 
writing  of  these  books  being  quite  uncertain;  third, 
the  general  epistles  and  the  Fourth  Gospel,  and,  more 
probably  here  than  earlier,  the  Apocalypse,  the  indi- 
vidual order  in  this  third  group  also  being  not  at  all 
certain.  The  general  period  of  composition  of  the  New 
'  Testament  writings  is  between  about  the  year  50  and 
the  year  100,  or  a  little  later. 

In  the  New  Testament  there  is  nothing  to  show  when 
the  letters  of  Paul  were  collected,  or  when  the  Gospels 
were  brought  into  their  present  arrangement,  or  how 
either  of  these  collections  came  to  be  made;  and  naturally 
the  New  Testament  gives  no  clue  to  the  time  and  the 
circumstances  in  which  its  various  parts  were  assembled 
into  the  complete  collection  we  now  possess.     If  later 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT        137 

we  discover  information  by  means  of  which  we  can 
determine  at  least  the  time  when  the  collection  was 
complete,  that  is  as  much  as  we  can  expect.  Those  who 
collected  the  New  Testament  were  not  concerned  to 
leave  a  record  of  what  they  did;  their  interest  was  in 
the  writings  themselves. 


CHAPTER  XI 
THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN 

We  have  now  retraced  the  growth  of  the  Bible  up  to 
the  first  century  of  the  Christian  Era,  the  New  Testa- 
ment to  about  the  close  of  that  century.  What  we  have 
found  shows  that  the  Bible  at  that  time  consisted  of 
three  elements:  first,  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament,  used 
chiefly  by  the  Palestinian  Jews;  second,  the  Greek  Old 
Testament,  considerably  larger  in  extent,  used  by  Greek- 
speaking  Jews  and  Christians;  and,  third,  the  New  Tes- 
tament, just  arising  from  the  early  Christian  movement 
and  beginning  to  be  used  by  Jesus'  followers.  The  Law 
and  the  Prophets  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament  were  a 
definite  and  fixed  collection;  the  Hebrew  Writings,  as 
far  as  we  have  yet  discovered,  were  still  a  flexible  group 
of  books  and  apparently  indefinite  in  number.  The  Law 
of  the  Greek  Old  Testament  was  probably  as  definite  as 
the  Law  of  the  Hebrew ;  the  remainder  of  the  Greek  Old 
Testament  was  semifluid  in  its  contents  and  was  treated 
with  much  freedom  by  many,  if  not  by  all,  of  those  who 
used  it.  The  New  Testament  was  just  forming,  in  ways 
similar  to  those  which  had  brought  about  the  formation 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  inevitably  was  still  without 
fiixed  content  or  arrangement. 

While  such  was  the  situation  for  the  first  Christian 
century  as  a  whole,  the  statement  may  easily  mislead 
unless  one  or  two  points  are  considered  further,  partic- 
ularly as  to  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament.     This,  at  the 

138 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         139 

close  of  the  century,  had  probably  become  quite  definite 
in  the  case  of  the  Writings  as  well  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets.  The  evidence  for  this  is  not  to 
be  found  in  the  Writings  themselves;  we  should  not  ex- 
pect this.  It  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Greek  Old  Testa- 
ment; this  would  be  as  little  expected.  It  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  New  Testament;  the  writers  of  the  New 
Testament  were  concerned  with  other  matters.  It  is  to 
be  found,  first  of  all,  in  the  existence  of  the  Writings  as  a 
closed  collection  early  in  the  Christian  Era,  and  in  infor- 
mation which  comes  to  us  from  Jewish  writings  outside 
the  Bible  confirming  the  closing  of  the  third  division  of 
the  Israelitish  Scriptures  about  the  year  90  a.d.  It  was 
then,  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans 
in  the  year  70  and  the  scattering  of  the  Jewish  scribes 
from  that  ancient  center  of  Israelitish  learning,  that  a 
school,  or  headquarters,  of  Jewish  scholars  arose  at 
Jamnia,  northwest  of  Jerusalem,  entered  into  extended 
discussion  as  to  which  should  be  accepted  for  their 
sacred  books,  and  seems  to  have  arrived  at  considerable 
unanimity  of  opinion  on  the  books  approved.  Those 
accepted  were  not  essentially  different  from  the  present 
Law,  Prophets,  and  Writings,  that  is,  the  scribes  adopted 
the  Writings  and  added  them  to  the  two  earlier  collec- 
tions. 

This  was  a  very  natural  step  at  the  time.  The  Israel- 
ites had  ceased  to  be  a  nation  in  anything  more  than 
name.  Their  racial  ambitions  and  strivings,  however, 
especially  their  supreme  functions,  religious  insight,  and 
action,  could  not  be  stopped.  Rather  the  terrible  ex- 
periences through  which  they  were  passing  were  a  stimu- 
lus.    Moreover,  the  rise  of  Christianity  out  of  Judaism 


I40  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

and  as  a  protest  against  it  was  an  incentive  for  loyal 
Jewish  scholars  to  let  the  world  know  what  they  ac- 
cepted of  the  so-called  Israelitish  Scriptures  and  what 
they  rejected.  The  age-long  struggle-  between  Jew  and 
Christian  had  begun,  and  it  would  have  been  strange  if 
Israel  had  not  made  for  itself  a  peculiar  book  just  as  it 
became,  in  a  pre-eminent  sense,  a  peculiar  people. 

This  action  of  the  Jewish  leaders,  adopting  some 
books  as  sacred  and  rejecting  others,  was  of  little  import 
for  the  Christians.  For  them,  at  that  period,  the  Scrip- 
tures consisted,  first  of  all,  of  the  Greek  Old  Testament, 
which  was  still  a  flexible  collection.  With  these  books 
they  were  coming  to  esteem  various  Christian  letters, 
gospels,  and  other  writings,  all  composed  in  Greek. 
These  were  not  at  all  fixed  in  number;  they  were  the 
extensive  works  out  of  which  our  New  Testament  later 
arose,  and  their  limits  were  quite  flexible.  These  facts 
are  important  to  keep  in  mind.  Our  thought  of  Paul's 
letters,  for  example,  is  probably  quite  different  from  the 
thought  of  many  of  those  who  had  known  directly  of  his 
labors  and  his  writings.  For  some  of  them  portions  of 
his  letters  which  have  been  lost  may  have  been  as  pre- 
cious as  those  which  we  possess;  and  some  of  the  lost 
gospels  to  which  the  Preface  of  Luke  refers,  or  possibly 
others  of  which  we  do  not  know  at  all,  may  have  seemed 
indispensable  not  only  for  those  who  wrote  them  but  for 
many  others  of  the  early  disciples.  In  short,  Christian- 
ity possessed  a  manifold  collection  of  Christian  writings, 
but  there  was  as  yet  no  definite  New  Testament. 

At  this  point  one  aspect  of  the  relation  between 
the  New  Testament  writings  and  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  should  be  recalled.     The  earliest  Christians 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         141 

came  from  among  the  Jews  and  did  not  lose  their  devo- 
tion to  the  Jewish  Scriptures  when  they  became  Chris- 
tians. Some  of  the  most  influential  missionaries  to  the 
Gentiles,  like  Paul,  carried  that  devotion  to  the  Jewish 
Scriptures  over  to  the  Gentiles,  and  the  gentile  converts 
became  imbued  with  a  similar  love  for  the  Israelitish 
writings.  When  those  Jewish  missionaries  and  their 
converts  among  non-Jews  wrote  of  the  life  of  Jesus  or  of 
their  own  experience  and  the  lessons  they  had  learned 
it  was  as  natural  as  the  sunlight  for  them  to  employ  the 
thought  and  language  of  the  Old  Testament.  As  a 
result  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament  are  rich  in 
quotations  from  the  books  of  the  Old  (cf.  p.  9),  and,  as 
must  be  expected,  those  quotations  are  chiefly  from  the 
Old  Testament  in  Greek.  There  are  Hebrew  words 
carried  over,  but  the  way  in  which  they  are  used— often 
translated  by  the  writers — makes  clear  that  the  Hebrew 
was  an  alien  tongue,  and  that  quotations  from  the  Greek 
version  of  the  recognized  Scriptures  was  the  matter-of- 
fact  course  for  an  author  to  pursue.  In  this  respect,  then, 
as  well  as  in  those  previously  considered,  the  writings  of 
the  New  Testament  were  far  more  closely  related  to  the 
Old  Testament  in  Greek  than  to  the  Old  Testament  in 
Hebrew. 

While  what  has  been  said  thus  far  in  this  chapter  might 
appear  quite  remote  from  the  translation  of  the  Bible 
into  Latin,  precisely  the  opposite  is  actually  the  case. 
There  can  be  no  intelligent  understanding  of  the  Bible 
in  Latin  without  a  reasonably  clear  view  of  the  char- 
acter and  extent  of  the  Bible  as  it  was  employed  for 
translating  into  the  Latin  tongue ;  and  it  is  impossible  to 
have  in  mind  that  Bible  without  being  sure  of  the  Bible 


142  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  the  early  Christians,  the  books  which  they  accepted 
as  their  Scriptures.  These  are  now  before  us  with  as 
much  deiiniteness  as  the  Scriptures  had  at  the  close  of 
the  apostoHc  days.  The  Bible  of  the  early  Christians 
was  primarily  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek,  the  writings 
of  the  Christians  themselves  not  yet  having  reached  the 
esteem  in  which  the  Old  Testament  was  held. 

One  may  ask  why  a  Latin  translation  of  the  Bible 
was  made;  what  occasion  there  was  that  the  Bible  in 
Greek  should  receive  a  Latin  dress.  The  general  reply 
is  this:  A  considerable  portion  of  Christianity  became 
Latin-speaking,  and  there  had  to  be  a  Latin  translation 
of  the  entire  Bible  for  the  same  reason  that,  some  gen- 
erations earlier,  the  Greek-speaking  Jews  in  Egypt  re- 
quired a  Greek  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament. 
It  is  really  more  correct  to  say  that  early  Christianity 
was  accepted  by  people  who  were  Latin-speaking,  and 
that  the  Bible  of  necessity  was  carried  over  into  the 
language  which  these  Christians  used. 

It  is  worth  while  to  review  the  situation  somewhat 
more  in  detail.  For  doing  this  the  reader  may  recall  at 
once  what  the  Fourth  Gospel  states  (19:19,  20)  con- 
cerning the  inscription  which  was  placed  on  the  cross 
of  Jesus,  that  it  was  written  "in  Hebrew,  and  in  Latin, 
and  in  Greek."  Even  in  Palestine  then  the  languages 
of  the  people,  either  those  who  lived  there  or  visitors,  re- 
quired that  a  public  notice  appear  in  three  versions,  Latin 
apparently  having  the  second  degree  of  importance. 

In  other  portions  of  the  Roman  Empire,  of  which 
Palestine  was  no  more  than  a  third-rate  province,  Greek 
was  the  chief  means  of  communication;  this  was  the 
situation  in  Greece  and  Macedonia  of  course,  though 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         143 

other  languages  were  used  by  many  of  the  people,  and 
many  were  familiar  with  two  or  three.  Even  in  the  city 
of  Rome  itself  Greek  was  the  tongue  ordinarily  used. 
This  is  clear  from  the  fact  that  when  Paul  wrote  to  the 
Roman  Christians  he  employed  the  Greek  and  leaves  no 
hint  in  what  he  said  that  any  of  those  addressed  would 
find  the  form  of  speech  strange  to  their  ears.  Greek 
was  the  familiar  language  in  the  capital  of  the  Latin 
Empire,  and  this  should  be  kept  in  mind  as  we  proceed 
with  the  topic  before  us.  We  should  remember  indeed 
that  Paul  wrote  in  Greek  all  his  letters  of  which  we  know. 
In  short,  Greek  was  the  famiHar  language  of  ordinary  life 
throughout  the  Roman  world. 

It  was  not,  however,  by  any  means  the  only  language 
in  general  use.  With  it  everywhere,  at  least  where 
Roman  law  and  administration  had  occasion  to  go,  went 
the  Latin.  So  it  was  in  Palestine,  as  noted  above;  so 
it  was  in  the  other  provinces  and  divisions  of  the  empire. 
In  some  of  them  indeed  Latin  was  the  language  of  the 
people.  This  was  particularly  the  case  in  the  portions 
of  Northern  Africa  where  Rome  had  gained  control.  In 
the  two  or  three  centuries  before  the  time  of  Jesus,  Rome 
had  so  thoroughly  imposed  on  these  peoples  the  language 
and  customs  of  the  capital  city  that  the  people  of  North- 
ern Africa  remained  more  truly  Latin  than  the  inhab- 
itants of  the  city  of  Rome  itself.  While  the  city  had 
adopted  largely  the  language  of  conquered  Greece,  the 
people  across  the  Mediterranean  retained  the  Latin 
tongue  which  their  fathers  had  accepted  whether  they 
wished  or  not. 

In  the  Roman  world  then,  the  world  which  was  still 
inherently  the  Latin  Empire,  there  was  ample  occasion 


144  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

for  having  the  Scriptures  in  a  Latin  form.  Christianity- 
could  not  pass  freely  among  all  the  people  of  the  Roman 
realm  before  it  had  been  transmitted  into  Latin  speech. 

Yet,  strange  as  it  may  seem,  we  do  not  know  where 
first  Christianity  was  received  by  those  who  spoke  Latin, 
nor  where  first  the  Scriptures  were  Latinized.  We  do 
not  even  have  the  earliest  Latin  Bible,  except  as  we 
gather  it  by  combining  fragments  of  early  manuscripts 
and  the  many  quotations  used  by  the  early  Christian 
Latin  authors  and  thus  arrive  at  some  idea  of  what  the 
entire  translation  was.  And  this  leads  to  the  interesting 
conclusion  that  there  may  have  been  several,  perhaps 
even  a  considerable  number,  of  more  or  less  independent 
versions,  each  probably  covering  only  portions  of  the 
Bible,  though  some  may  have  included  most,  if  not  all. 
At  any  rate,  however  it  came  about,  the  fragments  them- 
selves of  those  early  Latin  scriptures  differ  widely  in 
their  renderings  of  the  Bible  language,  and  this  would 
hardly  be  the  case  if  there  had  been  a  single  version 
recognized  for  those  who  used  the  Latin  speech. 

Of  course  we  should  not  be  surprised  that  the  Bible 
in  Latin  did  not  appear  from  the  beginning  in  a  single 
recognized  translation.  The  very  opposite,  in  fact,  is 
what  we  might  expect.  Latin-speaking  converts  in 
Syria  or  in  Northern  Africa  would  not  wait  for  an  author- 
ized version;  someone  among  them,  or  the  missionary 
who  had  led  them  to  accept  Jesus,  who  understood  both 
Greek  and  Latin  would  naturally  meet  the  immediate 
need  by  translating  important  parts  of  the  Scriptures 
into  Latin,  which  the  converts  could  read,  just  as  modern 
missionaries,  for  the  converts  in  Asia,  Africa,  and  the 
islands  of  the  seas,  have  translated  the  Bible  into  the 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         145 

tongues  of  the  people  with  whom  they  worked.  And  thus 
in  the  course  of  time  the  Bible  as  a  whole  was  carried 
over  into  the  Latin  speech  and  became  available  for 
those  who  were  Hmited  to  the  use  of  that  language. 

How  early  this  occurred  we  can  infer  only  in  a  general 
way  from  the  use  of  these  varied  versions  by  the  early 
Christians  who  wrote  in  Latin  and  whose  writings  have 
been  preserved.  Among  these  we  have  pre-eminently 
Tertullian,  who  wrote  between  the  years  200  and  240, 
and  Cyprian,  who  died  as  a  martyr  in  258.  Both  of 
these  men,  particularly  Cyprian,  were  connected  with 
the  Christian  movement  in  Northern  Africa;  both  of 
them  quoted  from  Latin  Scriptures  as  though  the  Latin 
were  well  known  and  widely  accepted ;  and  yet  both  give 
evidence  of  large  variations  in  the  versions  which  they 
employed. 

This  is  important  for  itself  and  also  for  other  reasons. 
It  shows  that  the  earliest  Latin  Bible  of  which  we  know 
was  the  outcome  of  work  among  the  people  of  Northern 
Africa;  and  this  may  probably  indicate  that  the  version, 
or  versions,  were  made  in  connection  with  the  early  mis- 
sionary efforts  throughout  that  Latin-speaking  province 
of  the  empire.  If  Latin  translations  were  made  in  other 
parts  of  the  Roman  world,  they  merely  help  to  account 
for  the  existence  of  so  many  Latin  translations  in  the 
third  century  that  these  may  be  thought  of  as  almost  a 
confusion  of  versions;  and  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  the 
masses  of  the  people,  who  were  the  chief  users  of  these 
versions,  seem  not  to  have  been  troubled  by  the  varia- 
tions among  them. 

Such  was  the  general  situation  in  the  third  century, 
and  such  it  continued  to  be  through  the  fourth,  not  only 


146  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

in  Northern  Africa,  but  in  other  Latin-speaking  parts 
where  Christianity  had  gained  acceptance,  including  the 
rural  sections  of  Italy,  especially  those  remote  from  the 
city  of  Rome. 

In  the  meantime  the  fashion  in  language  was  altering 
in  the  capital  of  the  empire,  Rome  was  dropping  the 
use  of  Greek  and  returning  to  the  Latin  of  former  days, 
and  this  change  produced  a  demand  for  a  corresponding 
change  in  the  accepted  text  of  the  Scriptures.  There 
were  the  Latin  versions  which  we  have  been  considering 
ready  for  use,  to  be  sure;  but  they  did  not  satisfy  the 
literary  tastes  of  the  capital  elite.  They  were  unsatis- 
factory, not  only  because  of  their  variations  and  uncer- 
tainty, but  also  because  they  offended  imperial  culture. 
Something  better  must  be  obtained. 

Such  are  the  conditions  out  of  which,  just  before  and 
following  the  year  400,  arose  the  Editio  Vulgata,  the 
common  version  of  the  Latin  Christian  world,  the  Vul- 
gate. And  we  must  consider  briefly  some  of  the  inci- 
dents connected  with  its  origin. 

Chief  among  these  incidents  were  two  men.  One  of 
these  was  the  Roman  bishop,  or  pope,  from  366  to  384, 
whose  name  was  Damasus.  He  was  himself  concerned 
for  literature  and  wrote  in  both  prose  and  poetry.  The 
demand  for  a  more  literary  version  of  the  Bible  easily 
appealed  to  him.  The  other  man  was  Jerome,  or,  as  his 
name  is  more  fully  written,  Sophronius  Eusebius  Hier- 
onymus.  He  was  born  of  wealthy  parents  at  Stridon  in 
what  is  now  the  southern  part  of  Austria-Hungary.  His 
birth  brought  opportunity  for  education,  travel,  and 
culture.  He  was  trained  in  all  the  arts  of  Latin  and 
Greek  literature,  and  he  gave  himself  to  the  earnest 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         147 

study  of  Hebrew.  Correspondence  and  friendship  be- 
tween him  and  Damasus  opened  the  way  for  Damasus 
to  ask  the  accomplished  scholar  and — for  such  he  had 
become — the  devoted  Christian  to  prepare  the  desired 
revision  of  the  Latin  Scriptures.  This  request  was  prob- 
ably made  not  far  from  the  beginning  of  the  year  382, 
when  Jerome  went  to  Rome  and  entered  into  that  close 
companionship  with  Damasus  which  was  broken  only  by 
the  latter 's  death  toward  the  close  of  384. 

It  was  the  thought  of  Damasus  and  the  plan  of 
Jerome  merely  to  revise  the  current  Latin  versions  into 
a  single  better  version,  making  corrections  from  the  text 
of  the  Septuagint  for  the  Old  Testament  and  from  the 
best  Greek  texts  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
There  was  no  thought  then  of  bringing  the  old  Testa- 
ment into  accord  with  its  Hebrew  original. 

The  first  portion  of  the  Bible  revised,  as  has  often 
been  the  case  in  modern  missionary  enterprise,  was  the 
Gospels  and  the  Psalms,  the  revision  of  the  former  ap- 
pearing in  the  year  383.  The  situation  and  the  task  are 
best  seen  from  parts  of  the  Preface  which  Jerome  wrote 
for  the  Gospels  and  addressed  to  Damasus.^ 

Jerome  said: 

You  urge  me  to  revise  the  old  Latin  version,  and,  as  it  were, 
to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  copies  of  the  Scriptures  which  are  now 
scattered  throughout  the  world;  and,  inasmuch  as  they  differ  from 
one  another,  you  would  have  me  decide  which  of  them  agree  with 
the  Greek  original.  The  labor  is  one  of  love,  but  at  the  same  time 
both  perilous  and  presumptuous;  for  in  judging  others  I  must  be 

'  I  quote  here,  and  also  further  selections  later,  from  the  language 
of  Jerome  according  to  the  Select  Library  of  Nicene  atid  Posl-Nicene 
Fathers  of  the  Christian  Church  (Second  Series,  edited  by  Drs.  Philip 
Schaff  and  Henry  Wace),  VI,  487  ff. 


148  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

content  to  be  judged  by  all;  and  how  can  I  dare  to  change  the 
language  of  the  world  in  its  hoary  old  age,  and  carry  it  back  to  the 
early  days  of  its  infancy?  Is  there  a  man,  learned  or  unlearned, 
who,  when  he  takes  the  volume  into  his  hands,  and  perceives  that 
what  he  reads  does  not  suit  his  settled  tastes,  will  not  break  out 
immediately  into  violent  language,  and  call  me  a  forger  and  a  pro- 
fane person  for  having  the  audacity  to  add  anything  to  the  ancient 
books,  or  to  make  any  changes  or  corrections  therein  ?  Now 
there  are  two  consoHng  reflections  which  enable  me  to  bear  the 
odium — in  the  first  place,  the  command  is  given  by  you  who  are 
the  supreme  bishop;  and  secondly,  even  on  the  showing  of  those 
who  revile  us,  readings  at  variance  with  the  early  copies  cannot  be 
right.  For  if  we  are  to  pin  our  faith  to  the  Latin  texts,  it  is  for 
our  opponents  to  tell  us  which;  for  there  are  almost  as  many  forms 
of  the  text  as  there  are  copies.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  we  are  to 
glean  the  truth  from  a  comparison  of  many,  why  not  go  back  to 
the  original  Greek  and  correct  the  mistakes  introduced  by  inac- 
curate translators,  and  the  blundering  alterations  of  confident  but 
ignorant  critics,  and,  further,  aU  that  has  been  inserted  or  changed 
by  copyists  more  asleep  than  awake  ?  (cf.  p.  126). 

No  comment  is  needed  to  make  clear  how  the  mere 
announcement  of  a  revision  of  the  current  translations, 
together  with  the  appearance  of  advance  portions,  as 
Jerome's  language  suggests,  was  sufficient  to  arouse 
bitter  criticism.  Those  of  our  day  who  recall  the  oppo- 
sition stirred  up  by  the  appearance  of  the  Revised  Ver- 
sion in  1 88 1  will  readily  note  the  parallel  and  will  better 
understand  the  odium  which  Jerome  had  to  face. 

The  death  of  Damasus  in  384  produced  a  great 
change  in  the  plans  which  he  and  Jerome  had  in  mind. 
The  new  bishop,  Siricius,  in  his  attitude  toward  Jerome 
and  his  work,  was  the  opposite  of  all  that  Damasus  had 
been.  Naturally  Jerome  left  the  city.  He  decided  to 
return  to  Palestine,  where  he  had  passed  portions  of  his 
earlier  life.     With  friends  he  made  the  journey  by  way 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         149 

of  Greece  and  Egypt,  finally  settling  at  Bethlehem,  in 
386,  where  he  lived  until  his  death,  probably  in  420, 
being  the  leader  of  a  monastic  community  throughout 
the  long  period  of  thirty-four  years. 

This  turn  of  affairs  did  not  stop  his  work  of  Bible 
revision,  though  it  temporarily  interfered  with  it.  If 
the  Roman  bishop  did  not  care  for  his  improvement  of 
the  Scripture  translations,  there  were  friends  who  did. 
He  responded  to  their  requests.  In  doing  this  for  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  he  gave  up  a  mere  bettering 
of  the  old  Latin  by  comparison  with  the  Septuagint. 
He  went  directly  to  the  Hebrew  for  the  books  in  that 
language  and  made  translations  which  fidelity  to  the 
Hebrew  required.  There  was  apparently  no  thought  in 
his  mind  that  he  was  preparing  a  translation  of  the 
Bible  which  would  be  widely  used  and  remain  for  gen- 
erations the  accepted  form  of  Scripture  thought.  He 
was  only  transferring  faithfully  into  Latin,  the  best 
Latin  his  extended  culture  could  command,  that  He- 
brew thought  which  his  friends  could  not  read  in  its 
original  form.  See  how  he  put  it,  as  we  find  his  lan- 
guage in  the  Preface  to  the  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings, 
as  he  was  sending  the  translation  to  his  friends  Paula  and 
Eustochium : 

First  read,  then,  my  Samuel  and  Kings;  mine,  I  say,  mine. 
For  whatever  by  dihgent  translation  and  by  anxious  emendation 
we  have  learnt  and  made  our  own,  is  ours.  And  when  you  under- 
stand that  whereof  you  were  before  ignorant,  either,  if  you  are 
grateful,  reckon  me  a  translator,  or,  if  ungrateful,  a  paraphraser, 
albeit  I  am  not  in  the  least  conscious  of  having  deviated  from  the 
Hebrew  original. 

Thus  faithful  was  he  to  the  original  language  of  the 
Old  Testament,  which  few  of  the  Christians  of  his  day 


I50  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

could  use  with  assurance,  or  could  translate  into  the  best 
Latin  of  the  time.  In  the  Preface  to  his  version  of  the 
Book  of  Job  he  recurs  to  the  subject  and  adds  important 
data  concerning  the  service  his  rendering  furnished. 
Here  is  part  of  what  he  said  in  forwarding  his  translation 
of  the  book  to  unnamed  friends : 

Previous  to  the  publication  of  our  recent  translation  .  .  .  ". 
about  seven  or  eight  hundred  lines  were  missing  in  the  Latin,  so 
that  the  book,  mutilated,  torn,  and  disintegrated,  exhibits  its 
deformity  to  those  who  publicly  read  it.  The  present  translation 
follows  no  ancient  translator,  but  will  be  found  to  reproduce  now 
the  exact  words,  now  the  meaning,  now  both  together  of  the  origi- 
nal Hebrew,  Arabic,  and  occasionally  the  Syriac. 

In  such  language  he  did  not  mean  to  say,  of  course, 
that  any  of  the  Book  of  Job  was  written  in  Arabic  or 
Syriac.  He  was  merely  reminding  his  friends,  who  un- 
derstood his  familiarity  with  those  languages,  kindred  of 
the  Hebrew,  how  he  had  made  that  familiarity  contrib- 
ute to  an  understanding  of  the  Hebrew  and  so  to  the 
value  of  the  version  he  had  prepared. 

Thus  it  was  that  a  new  Latin  version  of  the  Scrip- 
tures came  into  existence.  Further  details  concerning 
other  portions  of  the  Bible  would  be  largely  repetitions 
in  substance  of  what  we  have  discovered  already.  The 
new  version  was  a  labor  of  love,  given  by  the  foremost 
scholar  of  the  age,  with  heroic  fidelity  to  the  original 
Scripture  languages  and  absolute  devotion  to  the  personal 
friends  for  whom  the  translations  were  framed.  The 
work  occupied  much  of  his  time  for  more  than  twenty 
years,  from  383  to  404.  The  result,  not  in  his  day,  but 
as  a  later  combination  of  his  various  labors,  was  the 
Vulgate. 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         151 

Before  we  proceed  farther  it  is  important  to  bear  in 
mind  the  extent  of  the  early  Latin  Bible  which  Jerome 
used  as  the  basis  for  the  version  which  he  produced.  To 
do  this  we  must  consider  both  the  Old  Testament  and 
the  New,  and  in  the  case  of  the  New  Testament  it  is 
necessary  to  discover  what  had  occurred  between  about 
the  year  100,  when  there  was  still  merely  a  large  number 
of  independent  Christian  writings,  and  the  year  400, 
when  our  present  New  Testament  seems  to  have  become 
a  definite  collection. 

As  far  as  the  Old  Testament  is  concerned  little  need 
be  said.  We  have  already  seen  that  the  Old  Testament 
of  the  early  Christians  was  the  Greek  rather  than  the 
Hebrew.  That  means  at  once  the  recognition  of  the 
larger  contents  of  the  Septuagint  as  the  writings  which 
had  been  carried  over  into  the  early  Latin  Old  Testament. 
While  the  fragmentary  condition  of  the  early  Latin 
manuscripts  leaves  the  matter  of  details  in  doubt,  there 
is  no  question  as  to  the  general  extent  of  the  books 
which  the  Latin-speaking  Christians  accepted.  It  was 
substantially  the  same  as  the  Greek  Old  Testament 
which  we  found  in  chapter  ix.  If  it  retained  something 
of  the  flexibility  of  Hmits  which  was  characteristic  of  the 
Septuagint,  we  need  not  be  surprised. 

A  discussion  of  the  course  of  events  which  led  to  the 
adoption  of  our  present  New  Testament  before  the  time 
of  Jerome,  if  the  discussion  were  with  any  degree  of 
fulness,  would  involve  the  writing  of  a  book  rather  than 
a  portion  of  a  chapter.  Such  books  have  already  been 
written.  The  need  here  then  is  sufficiently  met  if  we 
recognize  the  facts,  leaving  the  details  to  be  considered 
in  the  books  devoted  to  tha,t  subject.    The  main  facts 


152  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

then,  as  they  are  available  from  the  early  Christian 
records,  are  substantially  as  follows: 

Ignatius  of  Antioch  in  Syria,  who  wrote  some  letters 
on  the  way  to  martyrdom,  which  was  not  later  than  the 
year  117,  used  language  which  indicates  familiarity 
with  considerable  portions  of  the  New  Testament  but 
furnishes  no  information  as  to  whether  the  New  Testa- 
ment books  had  yet  become  a  single  collection.  Prob- 
ably the  evidence  from  him  is  against  such  a  collection, 
for  in  one  of  his  letters  (to  the  Smyrnaeans)  he  refers 
to  gospel  language  which  does  not  agree  with  anything 
in  any  of  our  four  Gospels  and  seems  therefore  to  have 
been  taken  from  a  writing  of  which  we  do  not  otherwise 
know.  Ignatius  would  hardly  have  used  such  material 
if  he  had  come  to  understand  that  only  the  four  Gospels 
which  we  have  were  recognized  sources  of  the  life  of 
Jesus. 

Justin  Martyr,  who  wrote  some  fifty  years  later, 
likewise  provides  suggestions  concerning  the  Christian 
writings  then  in  use  and  the  manner  in  which  they  were 
employed.  He  ordinarily  referred  to  the  Gospels  as  the 
"memoirs"  of  Jesus,  and  he  quoted  their  language  with 
much  freedom,  paraphrasing  some  passages  and  com- 
bining others;  but  this  need  not  surprise  us,  for  he  appro- 
priated the  language  of  the  Old  Testament  in  much  the 
same  way.  He  knew  the  letters  of  Paul  and  did  not 
hesitate  to  adapt  the  language  as  he  did  the  other  writ- 
ings. Altogether,  as  to  a  fixed  collection  of  New  Testa- 
ment books,  he  gives  us  no  guide. 

Concerning  the  situation  about  a  generation  later, 
that  is,  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  second  century,  we  have 
more  definite  material.    This  material  is  the  so-called 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         153 

Muratorian  fragment,  which  contains  a  Kst  of  New  Tes- 
tament books  with  comments  upon  their  use  and  the 
estimate  in  which  they  were  held.  This  valuable  docu- 
ment was  discovered  in  the  Ambrosian  Library  at  Milan 
by  the  Italian  scholar  Muratori,  whose  name  it  bears, 
and  was  pubhshed  by  him  in  1740.  The  manuscript  is 
thought  to  have  been  made  in  the  eighth,  or  possibly  the 
seventh,  century,  but  it  is  a  copy  from  much  earlier 
times,  and  the  work  is  believed  to  have  been  written  as 
early  as  the  year  200,  or  even  a  few  years  previous  to 
that  date.  The  fragment  begins  with  part  of  a  sentence, 
which  evidently  describes  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  since  the 
sentences  following  deal  with  Luke  and  John.  There 
is  no  doubt  accordingly  that  it  contained  a  statement 
concerning  Matthew;  and  preceding  pages  may  have 
contained  a  list  of  Old  Testament  books.  It  is  impor- 
tant for  us  because  of  its  list  of  the  books  relating  to 
Jesus  and  the  apostles.  Indeed  we  ought  to  consider  not 
only  the  list  of  the  books  but  the  comments  of  the  writer 
concerning  them,  and  this  leads  to  a  quotation  of  the 
entire  fragment  as  far  as  it  deals  with  the  Christian 
writings.^     The  fragment  reads: 

with  whom,  however,  he  was  associated  and  so  was  quaHfied  to 
speak. 

The  third  book  of  the  gospel,  that  according  to  Luke,  Luke 
the  well-known  physician,  after  the  ascension  of  Christ,  composed 
in  his  own  name  as  he  had  received  the  material,  having  been 

'  I  translate  from  the  Latin  text  as  emended  by  the  late  Professor 
Brooke  Foss  Westcott  and  printed  in  his  General  Survey  of  the  History  of 
the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament,  6th  ed.,  pp.  534-38.  The  reader  should 
remember  that  parts  of  the  Latin  are  hopelessly  corrupt  and  the  language 
quite  uncertain,  but  that  this  does  not  affect  the  meaning  of  the  docu- 
ment as  a  whole. 


154  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

aided  by  companionship  with  Paul.  Though  he  had  not  seen  the 
Lord  in  the  flesh,  yet  he  was  fitted  to  undertake  the  work,  and  so 
he  began  his  narrative  from  the  birth  of  John  the  Baptist. 

The  fourth  of  the  gospels  was  written  by  John,  one  of  the 
disciples.  As  he  and  the  other  disciples  and  bishops  were  to- 
gether, he  said  to  them:  "Fast  with  me  for  three  days  from  today, 
and  then  let  us  tell  each  other  what  has  been  revealed  to  us." 
That  night  it  was  revealed  to  Andrew,  one  of  the  apostles,  that 
John  should  write  everything  in  his  own  name,  all  the  others 
approving Why  need  we  wonder,  then,  that  John,  re- 
peatedly even  in  his  letters,  introduced  the  matter  by  saying: 
"What  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  and  heard  with  our  ears,  and 
our  hands  have  fondled,  we  have  written"?  [Cf.  I  John  i:i.] 
Accordingly,  he  presented  himself  not  only  as  one  who  had  seen 
but  as  one  who  had  heard  and  one  who  had  written  in  order  all  the 
marvelous  things  of  the  Lord. 

The  acts  of  all  the  apostles  are  written  in  one  book.  Luke 
compiled  it  for  the  noble  Theophilus,  Luke  himself  having  been 
present  when  the  incidents  occurred,  as  he  shows  by  omitting  the 
martyrdom  of  Peter  and  the  departure  of  Paul  as  he  was  on  his 
way  from  our  city  of  Rome  to  Spain. 

The  letters  of  Paul  themselves  show,  for  those  who  desire  to 
understand,  what  they  are,  where,  and  for  v/hat  purpose  they  were 
sent.  First  of  all,  one  to  the  Corinthians  forbidding  divisions  in 
the  church.  Then  to  the  Galatians,-;  on  circumcision.  Next 
he  wrote  to  the  Romans  with  more  detail  an  exposition  of  the 
Scriptures,  arguing  profoundly  that  Christ  is  the  source  of  the 
Scriptures.  These  letters  it  is  needful  for  us  to  discuss  individually, 
since  the  blessed  apostle  Paul  himself,  following  the  example  of 
his  predecessor  John,  wrote  to  only  seven  churches  by  name,  as 
follows:  to  the  Corinthians  first,  Ephesians  second,  Philippians 
third,  Colossians  fourth,  Galatians  fifth,  Thessalonians  sixth, 
Romans  seventh;  to  the  Corinthians  and  Thessalonians,  rightly, 
a  second  time  for  their  correction.  Only  one  church,  however,  is  to 
be  recognized,  though  it  is  scattered  over  all  the  earth.  And 
John  likewise  had  the  privilege  of  writing  to  seven  churches,  yet 
he  spoke  to  all.  Fortunately,  Paul  wrote  one  letter  to  Philemon, 
one  to  Titus,  and  two  to  Timothy  as  a  token  of  love  and  distinc- 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         155 

tion.  These  are  held  in  honor  by  the  universal  church,  however, 
for  the  regulation  of  church  discipline.  There  is  current  also  a 
letter  to  the  Laodiceans  and  another  to  the  Alexandrians,  both 
falsely  attributed  to  Paul  and  dealing  with  the  heresy  of  Marcion; 
and  there  are  various  other  letters  which  cannot  be  accepted  by 
the  church  universal;  for  gall  will  not  properly  mix  with  honey. 
The  letter  of  Jude,  however,  and  two  bearing  the  name  of  John 
are  retained  among  general  letters.  Also,  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon 
written  by  his  friends  in  his  honor. 

The  apocalypses  of  John  and  Peter  we  are  disposed  to  accept, 
though  some  among  us  are  unwilling  for  these  to  be  read  in  the 
church  service.  The  Shepherd,  indeed,  was  written  very  recently, 
in  our  own  time,  at  the  city  of  Rome,  by  Hermas,  while  his  brother 
Pius  was  in  the  bishop's  chair  [date  uncertain,  perhaps  about 
140-55]  in  the  city  of  Rome.  And  some  think  it  worthy  to  be 
read,  but  not  to  be  published  for  the  use  of  the  people  in  the 
church  service,  nor  to  have  recognition  with  the  prophets  com- 
pleting their  number,  nor  among  the  apostles  till  the  end  of 
time. 

The  letters  of  Arsinous,  or  Valentinus,  or  Metiades,  however, 
we  do  not  think  of  accepting.  Who  they  were  who  wrote  the  new 
book  of  psalms  of  Marcion,  with  those  of  Basilides,  founder  of  the 
Asiatic  Cataphrygians  .... 

Thus  the  fragment  breaks  off,  leaving  us  in  even 
greater  uncertainty  than  the  translation  suggests,  and 
more  in  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  here  than  as  to  the 
meaning  of  the  opening  phrase  of  the  fragment.  Never- 
theless the  general  import  of  the  narrative  is  sufficiently 
definite.  It  is  an  estimate,  probably  before  the  year 
200,  of  the  writings  which  properly  belonged  in  the  col- 
lection of  Christian  Scriptures.  Apparently  it  was  more 
than  the  estimate  of  an  individual.  Its  reference  to  the 
city  of  Rome  indicates  that  it  originated  there.  Very 
likely  it  represents  the  Roman  view  of  its  time.  That 
it  was  regarded  as  valuable  and  copied  for  preservation 


156  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

through  five  or  six  centuries  points  to  the  same  conclu- 
sion. 

The  reader  should  study  the  fragment  with  care,  per- 
mitting each  statement  to  leave  its  own  proper  impres- 
sion concerning  the  status  of  Christian  writings  in  that 
early  period  from  which  the  fragment  comes.  Among 
the  quite  unexpected  impressions  will  be  the  omission  of 
the  letter  to  the  Hebrews,  the  reference  to  a  letter  to  the 
Laodiceans,  and  one  to  the  Alexandrians,  the  inclusion 
of  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  among  the  Christian  writings 
rather  than  among  the  Jewish,  the  mention  of  the  Shep- 
herd of  Hermas,  and  the  association  of  an  apocalypse 
of  Peter  with  that  of  John.  In  short,  about  one  hundred 
years  after  the  close  of  the  apostoHc  period  there  was 
still  considerable  flexibiHty  in  the  Hst  of  books  which 
later  became  fixed  as  the  New  Testament;  and,  for  our 
particular  study  in  the  present  chapter,  it  was  in  the 
midst  of  such  indefiniteness  concerning  Christian  Scrip- 
tures that  the  Latin  translation  of  the  New  Testament 
had  its  beginning. 

Indeed  this  indefiniteness  continued  to  a  considerably 
later  day.  We  know  this  from  the  language  of  Eusebius, 
the  father  of  church  history,  who  wrote  at  the  beginning 
of  the  fourth  century,  or  rather  as  far  along  in  the  cen- 
tury as  about  the  year  325.     His  language  is  as  follows: 

Since  we  are  dealing  with  this  subject  [the  question  of  the 
New  Testament],  it  is  proper  to  sum  up  the  writings  of  the  New 
Testament  which  have  been  already  mentioned.  First  then  must 
be  put  the  holy  quaternion  of  the  Gospels;  following  them  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles.  After  this  must  be  reckoned  the  Epistles  of 
Paul;  next  in  order  the  extant  former  Epistle  of  John,  and  likewise 
the  Epistle  of  Peter,  must  be  maintained.  After  them  is  to  be 
placed,  if  it  really  seems  proper,  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  concern- 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         157 

ing  which  we  shall  give  the  different  opinions  at  the  proper  time. 
These  then  belong  among  the  accepted  writings.  Among  the  dis- 
puted writings,  which  are  nevertheless  recognized  by  many,  are 
extant  the  so-caUed  Epistle  of  James  and  that  of  Jude,  also  the 
second  Epistle  of  Peter,  and  those  that  are  called  the  second  and 
third  of  John,  whether  they  belong  to  the  evangelist  or  to  another 
person  of  the  same  name.  Among  the  rejected  writings  must  be 
reckoned  also  the  Acts  of  Paul,  and  the  so-caUed  Shepherd,  and 
the  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  and  in  addition  to  these  the  extant 
Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and  the  so-called  Teachings  of  the  Apostles; 
and  besides,  as  I  said,  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  if  it  seem  proper, 
which  some,  as  I  said,  reject,  but  which  others  class  with  the  ac- 
cepted books.  And  among  these  some  have  placed  also  the  Gos- 
pel according  to  the  Hebrews,  with  which  those  of  the  Hebrews 
that  have  accepted  Christ  are  especially  delighted.  And  all 
these  may  be  reckoned  among  the  disputed  books.  But  we  have 
nevertheless  felt  compelled  to  give  a  catalogue  of  those  also,  dis- 
tinguishing these  works  which  according  to  ecclesiastical  tradition 
are  true  and  genuine  and  commonly  accepted,  from  those  others 
which,  although  not  canonical  but  disputed,  are  yet  at  the  same 
time  known  to  ecclesiastical  writers — we  have  felt  compelled  to 
give  this  catalogue  in  order  that  we  might  be  able  to  know  both 
these  works  and  those  which  are  cited  by  the  heretics  under  the 
name  of  the  apostles,  including,  for  instance,  such  books  as  the 
Gospels  of  Peter,  of  Thomas,  of  Matthias,  or  of  any  others  besides 
them,  and  the  Acts  of  Andrew  and  John  and  the  other  apostles, 
which  no  one  belonging  to  the  succession  of  ecclesiastical  writers 
has  deemed  worthy  of  mention  in  his  writings.  And  further,  the 
character  of  the  style  is  at  variance  with  apostolic  usage,  and 
both  the  thoughts  and  the  purpose  of  the  things  that  are  related 
in  them  are  so  completely  out  of  accord  with  true  orthodoxy 
that  they  clearly  show  themselves  to  be  the  fictions  of  heretics. 
Wherefore  they  are  not  to  be  placed  even  among  the  rejected 
writings,  but  are  all  of  them  to  be  cast  aside  as  absurd  and 
impious.' 

'  The  translation  is  that  of  the  Select  Library  of  the  Nicene  and  Post- 
Nicene  Fathers  of  the  Christian  Church,  Second  Series,  I,  155-57,  i.e., 
Book  III,  chap,  xxv,  of  Eusebius'  Ecclesiastical  History. 


158  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Such  was  the  estimate  of 'a  remarkably  well-informed 
man  in  the  first  half  of  the  fourth  century.  While  he 
permits  his  own  opinion  to  appear,  he  is  careful  to  out- 
line the  general  sentiment  of  the  different  classes  of 
thought  among  the  Christians  of  his  time.  What  he 
says  should  be  carefully  observed  if  one  desires  to  under- 
stand the  status  of  the  various  Christian  writings  and  to 
have  a  picture  of  the  list  which  composed  the  accepted 
New  Testament  in  Eusebius'  day.  Two  impressions  at 
least  will  be  received.  It  will  be  felt  that  when  two 
centuries  and  more  had  been  added  to  the  apostolic 
period  there  was  still  little  unanimity  as  to  what  should 
be  accepted  as  prop'erly  belonging  to  the  New  Testament. 
Eusebius  admits  this  even  for  those  to  whom  he  did  not 
apply  the  name  heretic.  Christians  in  good  standing 
differed  as  to  what  should  be  included  in  their  sacred 
writings.  The  matter  does  not  stop  there,  however. 
Some  of  those  whom  the  historian  stigmatized  as  here- 
tics may  have  been  as  sincere  as  he  and  his  recognized 
Christian  brothers,  and  some  of  the  writings  which  he 
and  others  repudiated  may  have  possessed  a  measure  of 
value,  if  not  as  Christian  teachings,  yet  as  reflection  of 
the  thought  of  those  who  composed  them  and  those  who 
found  pleasure  in  their  perusal.  We  should  be  interested 
to  possess  them,  at  any  rate,  and  they  may  have  been 
lost  to  the  history  of  Christianity  because  they  were  put 
under  the  ban  of  the  ecclesiastical  historian. 

The  most  important  thing,  however,  to  be  noted 
from  the  quotation  is  the  revelation  of  the  method  by 
which  a  book  was  accepted,  or  put  among  those  which 
were  banned,  or  left,  for  the  time  being,  in  a  state  of  un- 
certainty.    The  deciding  factor  was  the  estimate  of  the 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         159 

Christians  themselves.  In  the  case  of  books  concerning 
which  all  agreed  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century 
the  matter  was  ended  and  these  books  were  sacred. 
Books  which  all,  at  least  all  who  were  of  the  mind  of 
Eusebius,  rejected  were  thereby  discarded.  Where 
unanimity  of  opinion  could  not  be  reached,  there  each 
Christian  accepted  what  appealed  to  him  and  passed 
other  writings  by.  Thus,  only  some  sixty  years  before 
Jerome  began  a  revision  of  the  Latin  Bible,  the  New 
Testament  portion  was  still  without  definite  and  final 
limits.  How  this  affected  the  problems  which  Jerome 
undertook  must  be  considered  as  we  proceed. 

In  this  consideration  we  may  be  almost  surprised  to 
find  that  for  Jerome  the  problem  of  accepted  books  was 
not  so  much  one  concerning  the  New  Testament  as  one 
concerning  the  Old.  Indeed,  though  he  had  removed 
from  Rome  largely  because  of  opposition,  and  though  he 
was  in  controversy  much  of  the  remainder  of  his  life  with 
Augustine,  the  supreme  leader  in  Northern  Africa  and 
in  Italy,  his  idea  of  the  New  Testament  books  did  not 
differ  widely  from  that  held  by  Augustine.  It  is  best, 
therefore,  to  review  the  situation  for  the  two  Testaments 
together  and  to  begin  with  Jerome's  idea  of  the  Old. 

In  some  respects  the  Book  of  Daniel  stimulated 
greater  difference  of  opinion  than  any  other,  since  in  the 
Septuagint  it  is  so  different  from  the  Hebrew.  Jerome 
felt  this,  and  in  his  Preface  to  his  translation  from  the 
Hebrew,  written  to  his  friends  Paula  and  Eustochium, 
he  outhned  the  problem  and  the  manner  in  which  he  was 
inclined  to  dispose  of  it.  After  speaking  of  the  difficul- 
ties which  the  translator  of  the  book,  written  partly  in 
Hebrew  and  partly  in  Chaldee  (Aramaic,  as  we  now  call 


i6o  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

it),  must  face,  and  of  the  persistent  labor  which  he  had 
given  to  the  task,  he  continued: 

I  say  this  to  show  you  how  hard  it  is  to  master  the  book  of 
Daniel,  which  in  Hebrew  contains  neither  the  history  of  Susanna, 
nor  the  hymn  of  the  three  youths,  nor  the  fables  of  Bel  and  the 
Dragon;  because,  however,  they  are  to  be  found  everywhere,  we 
have  formed  them  into  an  appendix,  prefixing  to  them  an  obelus 
(t),  and  thus  making  an  end  of  them,  so  as  not  to  seem  to  the 
uninformed  to  have  cut  off  a  large  portion  of  the  volume. 

The  language  leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  personal  in- 
clination of  Jerome.  He  preferred  to  limit  the  Book  of 
Daniel  to  those  portions  which  were  in  Hebrew  and 
Aramaic.  Those  parts  of  the  book  which  existed  only 
in  Greek  he  consented  to  retain  as  an  appendix  out  of 
consideration  for  those  who  insisted  on  keeping  the 
book  in  its  Septuagint  form  and  extent. 

Other  quotations  from  his  language  would  point  in 
the  same  direction.  He  consented,  for  example,  to  re- 
vise the  Latin  of  the  Books  of  Tobit  and  Judith  in  accord 
with  the  Septuagint  text,  but  he  did  this  only  out  of 
deference  to  friends  who  desired  these  books  in  the  puri- 
fied Latin  which  they  could  gain  from  him  as  from  no 
one  else.  In  a  word,  if  Jerome  could  have  had  his  way, 
the  revised  Latin  Old  Testament  which  came  into  exist- 
ence from  his  labors  would  have  contained  only  the 
Hebrew  Law,  Prophets,  and  Writings  carried  over  into 
the  best  Latin  which  his  genius  could  command;  the 
portions  of  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek  not  found  in  the 
Hebrew  he  would  have  omitted  from  the  sacred  collec- 
tion of  Christian  Scriptures. 

At  the  same  time  he  was  not  concerned  for  the  He- 
brew order  of  the  books.    This  appears  from  a  long  letter 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN 


i6i 


which  he  wrote  to  Paulinus  as  early  as  the  year  394,  in 
which  he  described  the  value  of  Scripture  study  and  out- 
lined the  books  of  the  Bible.  This  outline  is  important 
in  that  it  shows,  not  only  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
which  Jerome  thought  of  as  belonging  properly  to  the 
collection,  but  also  the  order  of  their  arrangement  as 
they  stood  in  his  mind.  Here  are  the  books  in  the  order 
in  which  he  describes  them:^ 


Genesis 

Hosea 

Jeremiah 

Exodus 

Joel 

Lamentations 

Leviticus 

Amos 

Ezekiel 

Numbers 

Obadiah 

Daniel 

Deuteronomy 

Jonah 

Psalms 

Job 

Micah 

Proverbs 

Joshua 

Nahum 

Ecclesiastes 

Judges 

Habakkuk 

Song  of  Songs 

Ruth 

Zephaniah 

Esther 

I  Samuel 

Haggai 

I  Chronicles 

II  Samuel 

Zechariah 

II  Chronicles 

I  Kings 

Malachi 

Ezra 

II  Kings 

Isaiah 

Nehemiah 

He  had  become  interested  in  the  various  books  them- 
selves as  he  found  them  in  the  Hebrew  manuscripts, 
not  in  the  order  in  which  the  Israelites  held  them  as  the 
Law,  Prophets,  and  Writings.  Accordingly,  while  he  had 
adopted  the  Israelitish  view  of  the  proper  contents  of 
the  Old  Testament,  he  retained  the  idea  of  free  arrange- 
ment that  he  had  inherited  from  early  reading  of  the 
Septuagint. 

Following    the    foregoing,    in    the   same    letter,    he 
sketches  more  briefly  his  thought  of  the  New  Testament. 

^^Seleci  Library,  VI,|99-ioi, 


1 62  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

A  quotation  of  portions  of  his  language  will  best  show  his 
feeling : 

The  New  Testament  I  will  briefly  deal  with.     Matthew, 

Mark,  Luke,  and  John  are  the  Lord's  team  of  four The 

apostle  Paul  writes  to  seven  churches  (for  the  eighth  epistle — 
that  to  the  Hebrews — is  not  generally  counted  with  the  others). 
He  instructs  Timothy  and  Titus;  he  intercedes  with  Philemon  for 
his  runaway  slave.  Of  him  I  think  it  better  to  say  nothing  than 
to  write  inadequately.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  seem  to  relate 
a  mere  unvarnished  narrative  descriptive  of  the  infancy  of  the 
newly  born  church;  but  when  once  we  realize  that  their  author 
is  Luke  the  physician  whose  praise  is  in  the  gospel,  we  shall  see 
that  all  his  words  are  medicine  for  the  sick  soul.  The  apostles 
James,  Peter,  John,  and  Jude,  have  pubUshed  seven  epistles  at 

once  spiritual  and  to  the  point The  apocalypse  of  John 

has  as  many  mysteries  as  words.  In  saying  this  I  have  said  less 
than  the  book  deserves. 

The  statement  shows  that,  for  Jerome,  the  New  Testa- 
ment consisted  of  the  same  twenty-seven  books  that  are 
found  in  the  New  Testament  today.  The  order  of  ar- 
rangement is  somewhat  different,  and  Jerome  recognized 
that  even  in  his  day  Paul  was  not  everywhere  regarded 
as  the  author  of  the  letter  to  the  Hebrews.  Otherwise 
the  thought  of  Jerome  is  the  list  familiar  to  Christians  of 
the  present  time. 

There  were,  however,  other  counsels  among  the 
Christians  of  that  age,  and  other  counsels-  were  those 
that  prevailed.  Scholarly,  cultured,  literary,  brilliant, 
and  consecrated  as  Jerome  was,  he  was  in  Palestine,  and 
Palestine  was  not  the  portion  of  the  Roman  world  in 
which  Christianity  was  most  potent.  In  Northern 
Africa,  and  particularly  in  Rome,  were  to  be  found  the 
most  influential  forces  of  the  religion  which  was  coming 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         163 

to  dominate  the  empire.  Here  it  was  that  Augustine 
was  wielding  great  power,  a  power  which,  for  the  time, 
far  exceeded  that  of  Jerome.  If  Jerome  held  greater 
sway  over  those  who  knew  him  intimately,  Augustine 
exerted  a  power  over  the  people  as  a  whole  beyond  any- 
thing Jerome  may  have  ever  desired. 

Naturally  too  Augustine  was  interested  in  the  ques- 
tion of  the  proper  limits  of  the  sacred  Christian  writings. 
Fortunately  for  us  also  he  wrote  distinctly  what  he 
thought  about  the  question,  and  what  he  wrote  has  been 
preserved.     It  is  a  part  of  his  work  De  doctrina  (ii.  8).^ 

The  most  skillful  interpreter  of  the  sacred  writings  .... 
will  be  he  who  in  the  first  place  has  read  them  all  and  retained 
them  in  his  knowledge  ....  those  of  them,  at  least,  that  are 
called  canonical Now,  in  regard  to  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures, he  must  follow  the  judgment  of  the  greater  number  of 
catholic  churches;  and  among  these,  of  course,  a  high  place  must 
be  given  to  such  as  have  been  thought  worthy  to  be  the  seat  of 
an  apostle  and  to  receive  epistles.  Accordingly,  among  the  can- 
onical Scriptures  he  will  judge  according  to  the  following  stan- 
dard: to  prefer  those  that  are  received  by  all  the  catholic  churches 
to  those  that  some  do  not  receive.  Among  those,  again,  which 
are  not  received  by  all,  he  will  prefer  such  as  have  the  sanction  of 
the  greater  number  and  those  of  greater  authority,  to  such  as  are 
held  by  the  smaller  number  and  those  of  less  authority 

Now  the  whole  canon  of  Scriptures  on  which  we  say  this 
judgment  is  to  be  exercised,  is  contained  in  the  following  books: 
Five  books  of  Moses  ....  one  book  of  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun ; 
one  of  Judges;  one  short  book  called  Ruth,  which  seems  rather 
to  belong  to  the  beginning  of  Kings;  next,  four  books  of  Kings, 

and  two  of  Chronicles The  books  now  mentioned  are 

history,  which  contains  a  connected  narrative  of  the  times,  and 
follows  the  order  of  the  events. 

'  I  quote  from  Select  Library  ....  First  Series,  II,  538-39,  the 
most  important  portions  of  the  language. 


1 64  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

There  are  other  books  which  seem  to  follow  no  regular  order, 
and  are  connected  neither  with  the  order  of  the  preceding  books 
nor  with  one  another,  such  as  Job,  and  Tobias,  and  Esther,  and 
Judith,  and  the  two  books  of  Maccabees,  and  the  two  of  Ezra. 
....  Next  are  the  Prophets,  in  which  there  is  one  book  of  th6 
Psalms  of  David;  and  three  books  of  Solomon,  viz.,  Proverbs, 
Song  of  Songs,  and  Ecclesiastes.  For  two  books,  one  called  Wis- 
dom and  the  other  Ecclesiasticus,  are  ascribed  to  Solomon  from 
a  certain  resemblance  of  style,  but  the  most  likely  opinion  is  that 
they  were  written  by  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach.  Still  they  are  to 
be  reckoned  among  the  prophetical  books,  since  they  have  at- 
tained recognition  as  being  authoritative.  The  remainder  are 
the  books  which  are  strictly  called  the  Prophets:  twelve  separate 
books  of  the  prophets  which  are  connected  with  one  another,  and 
having  never  been  disjoined,  are  reckoned  as  one  book;  the  names 
of  these  prophets  are  as  follows:  Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Obadiah, 
Jonah,  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakkuk,  Zephaniah,  Haggai,  Zech- 
ariah,  Malachi;  then  there  are  the  four  greater  prophets,  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Daniel,  Ezekiel.  The  authority  of  the  Old  Testament 
is  contained  within  the  limits  of  these  forty-four  books. 

That  of  the  New  Testament,  again,  is  contained  within  the 
following:  Four  books  of  the  Gospel,  ....  fourteen  epistles 
of  the  Apostle  Paul — one  to  the  Romans,  two  to  the  Corinthians, 
one  to  the  Galatians,  to  the  Ephesians,  to  the  Philippians,  two  to 
the  Thessalonians,  one  to  the  Colossians,  two  to  Timothy,  one  to 
Titus,  to  Philemon,  to  the  Hebrews;  two  of  Peter;  three  of  John; 
one  of  Jude ;  and  one  of  James ;  one  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles; and  one  of  the  revelation  of  John. 

The  two  views  are  before  us,  and  there  is  no  difficulty 
in  observing  the  difference  of  attitude.  In  the  thought 
of  Jerome  we  see  the  reverent  scholar  influenced  by 
study  of  the  ancient  sources  and  impressed  by  Hebrew 
inheritance;  in  Augustine  there  appears  the  able  and 
aggressive  ecclesiastic,  largely  contented  with  the  Scrip- 
tures as  he  finds  them,  and  concerned  chiefly  with 
church  authority  and  the  recognition  of  that  authority 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN        165 

on  the  part  of  individuals.  All  things  considered,  it  is 
easy  to  understand  why  the  view  of  Augustine  controlled. 

Clearly  it  did  control.  To  be  assured  of  this,  one  has 
merely  to  compare  the  preceding  list  with  the  Hst  which 
composes  the  Vulgate.  There  are  variations  between 
the  two  Hsts  in  the  order  of  books,  but  the  titles  are  the 
same.  The  difference  of  opinion  which  Augustine  recog- 
nized, as  to  what  books  were  to  be  accepted,  gave  way 
so  that  the  hst  he  advocated  held  the  field.  The  manner 
in  which  he  presented  his  thought,  a  mark  of  his  ability 
to  persuade,  was  a  deliberate  method  for  leading  others 
to  the  same  conclusion. 

As  far  as  the  New  Testament  was  concerned  the 
views  of  the  two  men  agreed  concerning  the  books  to  be 
accepted,  differing  only  as  to  the  authorship  of  Hebrews. 
On  this  point  naturally  the  estimate  of  Augustine  pre- 
vailed, as  it  did  concerning  the  Old  Testament,  and  the 
letter  to  the  Hebrews  has  ordinarily,  through  the  cen- 
turies, been  regarded  as  coming  from  the  pen  of  Paul. 
In  view  of  this  substantial  agreement  on  the  part  of 
these  two  eminent  leaders  we  can  readily  understand 
why  Christian  writings  other  than  those  in  our  New 
Testament,  some  of  them  very  favorably  considered  as 
late  as  the  fourth  century,  lost  their  recognition  from  the 
close  of  that  century  on,  except  for  individuals  or  local 
churches  here  and  there,  and  never  contended  seriously 
for  a  place  among  the  accepted  books.  It  is  from  the 
days  of  Jerome  and  Augustine  then  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment as  a  fixed  collection  practically  dates. 

The  foregoing  quotation  from  Augustine  was  written 
about  the  year  397.  Farther  along  in  the  same  discus- 
sion (ii.  15)  he  advises  concerning  the  best  version  for 


1 66  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

use  and  advocates  the  old  Latin,  which  is  to  be  corrected, 
if  needful,  from  the  Greek;  even  in  the  case  of  the  Old 
Testament  the  Septuagint  should  be  preferred  to  the 
Hebrew.  His  approval  of  the  old  Latin,  among  the 
Latin  versions  then  available,  was  not  strange.  The 
translation  of  Jerome  was  not  yet  finished  and  had  had 
no  great  opportunity  for  recognition,  having  been  made 
primarily  for  the  personal  use  of  his  friends.  Even  if 
Jerome's  work  had  been  completed,  however,  Augustine, 
great  and  devoted  Christian  as  he  was,  was  not  the  type 
of  man  to  have  turned  readily  to  the  new  version.  In 
justice  to  him,  nevertheless,  it  should  be  added  that  be- 
fore his  death,  in  430,  he  seems  to  have  recognized  some- 
thing of  the  worth  of  Jerome's  work. 

The  outcome  is  highly  interesting.  For  generations 
both  the  old  Latin  and  Jerome's  versions  were  used,  just 
as  in  our  day  both  authorized  and  revised  Bibles  are 
found.  In  the  course  of  time,  however,  the  superior 
translation  from  JeromiC  gradually  gained  in  favor  until 
it  largely  superseded  the  old  Latin. 

The  growth  in  acceptance  and  influence  of  the  ver- 
sion of  Jerome,  until  it  came  to  be  the  common  version 
for  the  Latin-speaking  world,  accordingly  developed 
from  the  merits  of  the  work  itself  rather  than  from  offi- 
cial action.  Occasion  for  official  authorization  did  not 
arise,  in  fact,  until  after  the  beginning  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, when  the  Catholic  church,  in  the  Council  of  Trent, 
issued  a  decree  covering  the  matter.  Previous  to  that 
decree  it  was  possible  for  a  Catholic  in  good  standing  to 
advocate  the  adoption  of  such  a  view  as  that  of  Jerome; 
from  the  issuing  of  that  decree,  April  8,  1546,  every 
portion  of  the  Vulgate,  for  the  CathoHc  church,  is  declared 


THE  BIBLE  TRANSLATED  INTO  LATIN         167 

to  be  of  equal  authority;  and  a  Catholic  must  recognize 
the  Vulgate  alone  as  the  sacred  collection,  superior  to 
both  Greek  and  Hebrew. 

There  is  need  to  consider  briefly  the  contents  of  that 
official  Vulgate.  To  put  the  matter  accurately  I  may 
be  pardoned  for  quoting  the  words  of  the  decree,  which 
gives  the  general  description  .of  the  accepted  books  as 
follows:  "haec  ipsa  vetus  et  vulgata  editio,  quae  longo 
tot  saeculorum  usu  in  ipsa  ecclesia  probata  est"  (this 
same  old  and  common  version,  which  by  its  long  use 
through  so  many. centuries  in  the  church  itself  has  been 
approved).  Thus,  while  the  decree  determined  a  par- 
ticular collection  of  books,  it  did  not  distinguish  and 
approve  a  particular  translation,  and  there  have  been  dis- 
cussions as  to  what  text  the  description  should  be  under- 
stood to  include.  That  particular  question  seems  still 
to  be  open,  for  within  the  last  few  years  there  have 
appeared  announcements  to  the  effect  that  the  papal 
authorities,  with  the  approval  of  the  Pope,  will  publish 
a  revision  of  the  ofhcial  text. 

While  the  wording  of  the  Latin  text  is  thus  uncertain 
and  may  conceivably  be  altered  as  the  outcome  of  revi- 
sion, there  is  no  uncertainty  concerning  the  books  which 
are  included.  The  decree  provided  a  list.  I  have  indi- 
cated above  how,  with  some  variations  in  the  order  of  the 
books,  it  is  the  list  of  Augustine. 

That  list,  however,  is  easily  misunderstood.  To  be 
aware  of  the  actual  contents  one  must  remember  that, 
in  the  Vulgate,  Jeremiah  may  include  Baruch,  and  the 
Books  of  Esther  and  Daniel  are  those  books  as  they 
appear  in  the  Septuagint,  thus  retaining  the  additions  to 
Esther  (10:4 — 16: 24),  Susanna,  and  Bel  and  the  Dragon, 


1 68  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

which  the  reader  will  recall  from  the  Septuagint  list  in 
chapter  ix  (p.  105).  Accordingly  the  official  Vulgate, 
the  authoritative  Catholic  Bible,  contains  most,  though 
not  all,  of  the  Septuagint  as  it  was  current  among  the 
early  Christians,  and  in  this  Vulgate  we  have  the  Bible 
translated  into  Latin,  as  it  finally  stands.  In  some 
editions,  even  since  the  Council  of  Trent,  there  have 
been  printed  as  an  appendix  the  Prayer  of  Manassas, 
III  Esdras,  and  IV  Esdras,  but  that  has  not  given 
official  authorization  to  these  books. 

It  will  easily  be  seen  that  the  period  of  Bible  develop- 
ment to  which  this  rather  long  chapter  has  chiefly  been 
given,  from  the  last  quarter  of  the  first  century  to  the 
beginning  of  the  fifth,  is  one  of  the  most  important  in  the 
history  of  the  Bible  growth.  One  might  almost  say 
that  the  modern  Bible  is  the  child  of  those  three  and  a 
quarter  centuries.  At  the  beginning  of  that  period  only 
the  Hebrew  Law  and  Prophets  were  a  definite  and  closed 
collection  of  sacred  books;  at  the  end  of  the  period  the 
limits  of  the  entire  Hebrew  Scriptures  had  been  fixed, 
and  the  contents  of  the  sacred  books  of  Christianity  had 
been  practically  determined  for  more  than  a  thousand 
years.  Only  the  upheaval  of  the  Reformation  in  the 
sixteenth  century  could  break  the  collection  and  give 
it  new  Hmits,  and  then  only  for  the  Protestant  branch 
of  the  Christian  world.  The  study  of  that  upheaval 
belongs  to  the  discussion  of  modern  versions. 


CHAPTER  XII 

OTHER  EARLY  VERSIONS 

The  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament  into 
Greek  and  the  carrying  of  the  entire  Bible  over  into 
Latin  have  had  most  to  do  with  the  growth  of  the  Bible 
in  the  Western  world.  An  understanding  of  the  course 
of  events  connected  with  those  translations,  as  we  have 
considered  them,  is  indispensable  for  understanding  the 
Bible  of  European  and  American  Christianity,  but  an 
intelligent  view  of  the  history  of  the  Bible  as  a  whole 
must  include  something  of  other  early  versions  as  well. 
Even  though  those  other  versions  have  had  little  or  no 
effect  on  the  particular  form  of  the  Bible  which  we  use, 
our  thought  of  the  Bible  growth  altogether  would  be 
one-sided  and  unfair  to  the  book  we  love  unless  it  in- 
cludes some  outline  of  the  versions  which  have  been 
influential  in  other  parts  of  the  world,  though  not  in 
our  own.  We  ought  therefore  to  consider  briefly  some 
early  translations  which  arose  in  Western  Asia,  in  East- 
ern Europe,  and  in  Egypt,  all  of  which  have  had  a  potent 
place  in  the  influence  of  the  Bible  as  a  whole.  Taking 
the  most  important  of  these  in  the  chronological  order 
of  their  origin,  we  may  notice  the  Syriac  version,  the 
Egyptian,  the  Gothic,  the  Armenian,  the  Ethiopic,  the 
Arabic,  and  the  Slavonic  versions.  Each  of  these  is 
worthy  of  far  more  attention  than  the  space  here  at 
command  will  permit. 

169 


I70  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Among  those  who  were  at  Jerusalem  on  the  Day 
of  Pentecost  (Acts  2:5-11)  were  "dwellers  in  Meso- 
potamia," who,  with  the  others  in  that  significant  list, 
are  described  as  "devout  men."  Naturally  they  were 
interested  in  the  unusual  message  which  came  to  their 
ears,  and  it  would  have  been  strange  if,  when  they  vis- 
ited again  their  native  land,  they  had  not  carried  some 
story  of  what  they  had  heard. 

Whether  the  story  of  the  gospel  so  early  found  a 
considerable  place  along  the  shores  of  the  upper  Tigris 
and  the  upper  Euphrates  rivers  and  the  lands  between 
we  are  unable  to  say.  It  is  not  difficult,  however,  to 
see  how  this  may  have  been  the  actual  course  of  events. 
Whether  it  was  or  not,  there  is  no  doubt  that  early  in 
the  Christian  movement,  perhaps  before  the  end  of  the 
first  century,  certainly  in  the  second  century,  Christian 
missionaries  had  planted  churches  in  the  Mesopotamian 
country,  and  the  records  of  the  work  of  Jesus  and  Paul 
and  others  associated  with  them  were  needed  there  for 
the  inspiration  and  guidance  of  the  ingathered  disciples. 

The  dominating  forces  in  those  parts  during  the 
early  Christian  days,  as  had  been  the  case  through  pre- 
vious centuries,  were  Semitic — Semitic  peoples,  Semitic 
speech,  and  Semitic  Ufe.  The  particular  type  of  Sem- 
itic speech  employed  there  during  the  formative  period 
of  Christianity  was  that  which  we  call  the  Syriac,  kin- 
dred to  Hebrew  and  Aramaic  and  Arabic.  Into  this 
Syriac  language  then  the  Scriptures  were  translated 
as  soon  as  the  Christian  movement  had  developed  far 
enough  to  make  a  demand  for  the  Bible  in  the  speech  of 
the  new  converts.  This  is  the  story  of  all  missionary 
endeavor. 


OTHER  EARLY  VERSIONS  171 

How  early  such  translations  occurred  we  cannot  tell. 
Whether  it  was  the  work  of  many  hands  or  of  few,  or  of 
one,  we  are  unable  to  say.  The  beginnings  of  the  Bible 
in  Syriac  are  lost  in  the  obscurity  of  the  primitive  times 
out  of  which  the  early  Syriac  Christian  movement  came. 
Before  the  close  of  the  second  century,  however,  the 
clouds  lift  enough  for  us  to  know  that  the  Bible  was 
already  there  in  the  language  of  the  people,  and  the 
Syriac  Scriptures  had  begun.  Tatian,  by  the  making  of  his 
famous  Diatessaron,  the  earliest  harmony  of  the  Gospels, 
about  the  year  172,  may  have  contributed  largely  to  the 
security  of  the  Gospels,  if  not  the  letters  of  Paul,  in  the 
Syrian  speech,  but  there  seems  Httle  doubt  that  portions 
of  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  the  Old,  had  ere  that 
found  an  enduring  place  in  the  Syrian  tongue  as  well  as 
in  the  Syrian  heart. 

Beyond  these  beginnings  of  the  Bible  in  Syriac, 
probably  one  of  the  most  important  aspects  of  that 
Bible  for  our  study  is  the  books  which  this  version  con- 
tained. Our  study  of  other  versions  has  prepared  us 
for  recognizing  that  the  contents  of  the  version  now  in 
hand  need  not  be  at  all  the  same  as  the  contents  of  our 
own  Bible,  or  even  the  contents  of  the  other  versions  we 
have  examined.  The  possibilities  are  further  increased 
as  soon  as  we  remember  that  the  Syriac  translation  may 
very  well  have  been  influenced  by  Semitic  thought  and 
Semitic  traditions. 

And  so  it  was.  The  Syriac  Old  Testament  followed 
closely  the  Hebrew  rather  than  the  Septuagint,  and 
Syriac  Christians  have  read  an  Old  Testament  quite 
like  our  own.  But  the  situation  concerning  the  New 
Testament  has  been  very  different.     The  Gospels,  as 


172  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

already  suggested,  have  been  in  Syriac  from  early  days, 
and  so  have  letters  of  Paul.  The  order  of  arrangement 
of  his  letters,  however,  has  been  quite  changed  from 
that  to  which  we  are  accustomed.  Galatians  has  stood 
first,  whether  because  it  was  probably  written  from 
Antioch  in  Syria,  so  close  to  the  center  of  Mesopotamian 
Christianity,  or  because  it  was  known  to  those  Chris- 
tians to  be  the  earliest  of  Paul's  letter,  who  can  tell? 
Then  followed  Corinthians  and  Romans  and  Hebrews, 
thus  indicating  that  Semitic  Christianity  ascribed  He- 
brews to  the  great  apostle,  or  perhaps  indicating  also 
how  its  Semitic  tendency  of  thought  appealed  to  the 
Syrian  mind. 

The  most  striking  aspect  of  the  Syriac  New  Testa- 
ment, however,  is  the  omission  of  books  which  we  have 
taken  for  granted  as  a  part  of  the  Christian  Scriptures. 
As  late  as  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  three  cen- 
turies after  the  days  of  Paul,  the  Syriac  translation  of 
the  New  Testament  did  not  include  any  of  the  seven 
general  epistles  or  the  Apocalypse.  It  was  limited  to 
the  Gospels  and  the  letters  of  Paul.  Later,  James, 
I  Peter,  and  I  John  were  added ;  but  II  Peter,  II  and  HI 
John,  and  the  Apocalypse  have  never  belonged  to  the 
Syriac  New  Testament,  properly  speaking,  though  they 
have  been  added  in  modern  times.  Why  the  Syriac  was 
thus  Hmited,  and  what  the  meaning  was  both  for  the 
early  days  of  Bible  history  and  for  the  development  of 
Syriac  Christianity — these  make  too  long  a  story  even 
to  be  outHned  here.  The  mere  facts,  however,  are  im- 
portant enough  to  be  given  a  place  in  our  thought  and 
thus  to  become  a  stimulus  to  further  consideration  as 
opportunity  may  arise. 


OTHER  EARLY  VERSIONS  173 

It  may  not  have  been  quite  correct  to  give  the  im- 
pression that  the  Syriac  translation  of  the  Bible  was  the 
next  after  that  of  the  Latin.  Indeed,  as  one  recalls  all 
that  has  been  sketched  above,  he  will  see  that  we  are 
in  doubt  as  to  whether  the  Latin  was  earlier  than  the 
Syriac,  since  the  earliest  evidence  concerning  each  points 
to  the  second  century  as  the  period  of  its  origin.  It  has 
been  the  importance  of  the  Latin  then,  rather  than 
assurance  of  priority  of  origin,  that  has  warranted  its 
fuller  treatment  and  its  apparent  priority  in  date.  Sim- 
ilar considerations  place  the  Egyptian  version,  or  rather 
versions,  following  the  Syriac,  since  the  Bible  in  the  lan- 
guages of  Egypt  also  goes  back  to  the  early  times  and  is 
shrouded  in  uncertainty  of  origin.  How  far  back  those 
indistinct  beginnings  date  we  can  merely  infer.  We 
can  readily  understand  that  they  may  have  been  in  the 
first  century,  but  the  data  for  assurance  are  lacking.  In 
the  second  century,  however,  or  at  any  rate  in  the  third, 
Christianity  was  established  in  Egypt,  and  the  first 
steps  at  least  of  a  translation  of  the  Scriptures  into  the 
language  of  the  people  had  taken  place. 

Egypt  always  of  course  has  been  separate  and  dis- 
tinct, in  life  and  thought  and  largely  in  civil  adminis- 
tration, from  the  districts  of  Northern  Africa  to  the 
west,  where  we  have  found  the  Latin  Bible  developing. 
Accordingly  Egypt  went  her  own  way  in  accepting  the 
message  of  the  gospel  and  a  translation  of  that  message 
into  the  speech  of  the  people  along  the  banks  of  the  Nile. 
Though  Greek  influence  had  been  potent  there  from  the 
days  of  Greek  glory  as  a  nation,  though  Israel  had  found 
large  share  in  Egyptian  life  and  had  permitted  that 
experience  to  be  controlled  by  Greek  culture  so  far  as  to 


174  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

accept  a  Greek  version  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  and 
though  Roman  power  had  swept  the  country  in  the  days 
of  the  Caesars  and  had  brought  the  land  into  subjection 
to  Italian  will,  Egypt  retained  a  people  that  clung  to  its 
native  speech  and  who  needed  the  Scriptures  in  Egyp- 
tian dress.  In  fact,  there  were  dialects  within  the 
boundaries  of  the  influence  of  Egyptian  life  and  speech, 
and  we  find,  as  an  outcome,  a  translation  of  the  Bible 
into  the  language  of  Northern  Egypt,  the  Bohairic,  the 
language  of  Southern  Egypt,  the  Sahidic,  and  into  a 
slightly  different  version  for  the  people  who  lived  in  the 
central  portions  of  the  country  and  on  its  confines. 
Thus  we  speak  of  Egyptian  versions  rather  than  of  an 
Egyptian  version.  Only  fragments  of  each  of  these 
remain,  but  they  are  sufficient  to  tell  of  their  early  ex- 
istence and  usefulness.  The  Old  Testament,  as  we 
should  anticipate  outside  of  Palestine  and  Semitic  influ- 
ence and  particularly  so  near  to  the  action  of  the 
forces  which  produced  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek, 
was  substantially  the  Septuagint  rather  than  the 
Hebrew. 

Within  a  century  then,  or  at  most  a  century  and  a 
half,  from  the  days  of  the  apostles  the  Bible  had  been 
translated  into  the  speech  of  the  people  of  Northern 
Africa,  of  Italy,  of  Syria,  and  of  Egypt.  The  inherent 
missionary  character  of  Christianity  was  manifesting 
itself  not  only  in  the  furnishing  of  evangelists  for  the 
people  but  also  in  the  preparation  of  the  Scripture  ver- 
sions which  the  needs  of  the  peoples  required;  and  with 
such  a  beginning  it  is  only  to  be  expected  that  similar 
enterprise  will  be  found  to  have  revealed  itself  in  other 
directions — and  so  it  did. 


OTHER  EARLY  VERSIONS  175 

The  next  wide  field  of  missionary  activity  was  in 
Southeastern  Europe,  that  portion  of  the  European  world 
which  we  call  the  Balkans.  Here  was  born  about  the 
year  310,  of  Christian  parents,  the  eminent  Christian 
and  linguist  whom  we  know  as  Ulfilas.  His  parents 
had  been  brought  from  Asia  Minor  as  captives  by 
Gothic  invaders,  and  he  himself  suffered  at  the  hands 
of  persecutors,  being  driven  toward  the  shores  of  the 
Black  Sea,  where,  in  Moesia,  he  is  said  to  have  made 
a  translation  of  the  Bible  for  those  who  had  taken  his 
parents  from  their  native  land  and  had  carried  the 
persecution  to  himself.  Indeed,  the  Goths  at  that  time 
being  without  a  written  language,  Ulfilas  not  only  made 
the  translation  but  prepared  the  alphabet  in  which  to 
express  the  thought,  using  largely  the  Greek  characters 
of  his  native  tongue.  Such  at  least  is  the  tradition,  and 
it  is  the  easiest  explanation  of  the  existence  of  the  Bible 
in  Gothic.  As  Ulfilas  died  about  the  year  382,  the  ver- 
sion, or  at  least  as  much  of  it  as  he  prepared,  is  earlier 
than  that  date.  Only  fragments  are  extant,  and  these 
furnish  the  basis  of  the  study  of  the  Gothic  language 
and  hterature.  Naturally  a  man  of  the  inheritance  of 
Ulfilas  followed  closely,  in  his  translation,  the  Bible  as 
he  found  it  in  Greek;  but,  strange  as  it  may  seem,  there 
is  a  definite  tradition  that  he  did  not  include  the  Books  of 
Kings,  since  he  felt  that  a  warlike  people  such  as  the 
Gothic  nations  did  not  need  books  which  were  chiefly 
concerned  with  war  and  easily  incited  to  war,  as  the 
Books  of  Kings  are  at  once  seen  to  do. 

Between  Mesopotamia  on  the  east  and  the  land  of 
the  Goths  on  the  west  lies  the  ancient  land  of  Armenia, 
whose  people  inhabit  the  shores  of  the  Black  Sea.    To 


176  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

these  Armenians  it  was  natural  that  the  gospel  should  be 
taken  within  no  long  period  of  time  after  the  early  mis- 
sionaries had  carried  it  to  the  better-known  lands  within, 
or  near,  the  empire  of  the  Caesars.  And  the  preaching 
of  the  gospel  to  the  people  here,  as  in  other  countries, 
was  inevitably  followed  by  a  translation  of  the  Bible 
into  the  Armenian  tongue.  As  early  as  about  the  year 
400  perhaps  such  a  translation  was  begun,  and  it  became 
a  part  of  the  Armenian  Christian  heritage.  In  the 
plain  near  the  ancient  mountain  of  Ararat,  it  is  thought, 
the  version  for  these  Armenian  people  was  prepared. 
And  one  of  the  most  interesting  features  of  the  transla- 
tion, in  the  direction  of  the  study  we  are  pursuing,  is  the 
very  unusual  order  of  the  New  Testament  books.  Fol- 
lowing the  Gospels  and  the  Acts  come  the  general 
epistles.  This  is  not  so  unexpected;  but  when  the. 
Apocal3^se  is  the  next  book,  followed  by  the  letters  of 
Paul  and  attached  to  these  is  a  letter  of  the  Corinthians 
to  Paul,  after  which  appear  Hebrews,  Timothy,  etc., 
with  various  manuscripts  giving  the  several  books  in 
still  other  arrangements  than  the  one  just  mentioned,  we 
recognize  at  once  the  freedom  with  which  the  New  Tes- 
tament writings  have  been  treated  in  the  course  of  the 
growth  through  which  the  Bible  has  passed.  Our  inter- 
est is  easily  heightened  as  we  take  into  account,  still 
farther  in  that  line  of  freedom,  how  the  Armenian  Old 
Testament,  though  a  not  distant  neighbor  to  the  Syriac, 
which  held  to  the  Hebrew  Umits  of  the  Scriptures, 
leaves  behind  the  influence  of  the  Syriac  and  includes 
the  writings  of  the  Septuagint  instead — in  fact,  reaches 
out  beyond  the  Septuagint  limits  and  gives  place  to 
several  of  the  Jewish  apocalyptic  books.     Thus  in  this 


OTHER  EARLY  VERSIONS  177 

somewhat  out-of-the-way  version  of  the  Bible  we  dis- 
cover a  very  exceptional  irregularity  of  biblical  growth. 

Not  long  after  the  gospel  was  carried  northeast  to 
the  people  of  Armenia  it  was  taken,  in  the  same  mis- 
sionary spirit,  far  south  to  the  headwaters  of  the  Nile, 
and  the  land  of  Abyssinia,  the  home  of  the  ancient 
Ethiopians,  received  the  message.  With  the  gospel, 
here  as  elsewhere,  went  the  translating  of  the  Bible  into 
the  speech  of  the  people  to  whom  the  good  news  had 
been  taken.  How  early  this  occurred  in  Ethiopia,  as  in 
other  fields  that  we  have  considered,  there  is  no  possi- 
bility of  stating  with  confidence.  Perhaps  there  was  an 
Ethiopic  version  as  early  as  the  year  600  and,  it  may  be, 
considerably  earlier.  In  addition  to  the  fact  of  such 
an  early  translation  we  may  well  be  concerned  to  find 
that  the  Ethiopians,  like  the  Armenians,  read  even  a 
larger  collection  than  that  of  the  Septuagint,  so  that 
their  Old  Testament  included  the  Book  of  Enoch  and 
the  Book  of  Jubilees,  IV  Ezra,  and  writings  ascribed  to 
Baruch,  in  addition  to  those  which  the  Septuagint  and 
Vulgate  contained.  Their  New  Testament  also  had  its 
individual  character;  supplementary  to  the  usual  books 
it  included  a  collection  of  writings  called  the  Canon  Law, 
a  mark  of  the  broad  lines  of  interest  which  possessed 
these  Christians  in  the  distant  parts  of  the  African 
world. 

Perhaps  this  unusual  collection  accepted  by  the  Ar- 
menians at  the  north  and  another  exceptional  collection 
held  by  the  Ethiopians  far  to  the  south  have  more  sig- 
nificance than  the  mere  facts  themselves  imply.  How 
did  it  come  about  that  such  irregular  collections  devel- 
oped on  the  confines  of  the  Christian  realm?     Why 


178  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

should  the  growth  of  the  Bible  disclose  such  curiosities 
of  development  in  the  most  distant  parts  of  Christian 
activity  ?  Was  it  because  these  fields  of  life  and  thought 
were  remote  from  the  center  of  ecclesiastical  influence 
and  authority?  Was  there  a  freedom  in  the  distant 
lands  then,  just  as  the  missionary  countries  today  are 
those  which  sometimes  startle  the  Christians  at  home  by 
the  unusual  methods  which  they  employ  and  the  liber- 
ties which  they  take  with  the  established  ideas  and  cus- 
toms of  the  lands  which  have  carried  the  Bible  to  them  ? 
Possibly  so  at  least.  The  facts  at  any  rate  stimulate 
attention  and  furnish  material  for  further  thought  con- 
cerning the  meaning  of  Bible  growth. 

Now  we  observe  the  spread  of  Christianity  into  the 
lands  of  Islam  and  note  how  once  more  missionary  enter- 
prise includes  a  new  version  of  the  Christian  Scriptures. 
This  leads  to  the  consideration  of  the  Arabic  versions 
into  which  the  Bible  had  been  carried.  Since  Moham- 
med lived  in  the  sixth  century  and  the  Moslem  countries 
did  not  become  missionary  territory  until  later,  the 
Arabic  Bible  belongs  to  the  eighth  century,  or  farther 
along.  In  the  matter  of  its  contents  perhaps  the  most 
significant  factor  is  the  absence  of  the  Apocalypse  from 
among  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  this  absence 
suggesting,  either  that  Moslem  Christianity  grew  out  of 
Arabic,  which  never  accepted  the  Apocalypse,  as  would 
have  been  natural,  or  that  the  thought  of  Islam  has 
never  been  appealed  to  by  the  visions  of  the  apocalyptic 
portion  of  the  New  Testament.  In  any  case,  the  fact 
is  indicative  of  how  the  Apocalypse  was  a  book  cherished 
in  the  West  rather  than  in  the  East  of  the  world  of  early 
Christianity. 


OTHER  EARLY  VERSIONS  179 

One  more  translation  of  the  Scriptures  must  have 
attention  as  we  look  even  briefly  at  the  earlier  versions 
into  which  the  Bible  has  passed.  This  is  the  Slavonic. 
It  is  attributed  to  two  men  who  were  brothers,  Cyril  and 
Methodius,  sons  of  a  Greek  nobleman  of  Thessalonica, 
where  they  had  opportunity  to  understand  Slavic  speech 
as  well  as  their  native  Greek.  They  lived  in  the  ninth 
century,  so  that  before  the  year  900  the  Bible,  as  well 
as  the  gospel  message,  had  been  carried  to  the  Slavic 
peoples.  As  the  Slavs,  still  in  their  primitive  life,  lacked 
a  written  language,  Cyril,  the  tradition  says,  created  an 
alphabet  with  which  to  write  the  translation  he  and 
Methodius  had  made,  and  their  labors  and  their  interest 
were  more  than  rewarded.  They  not  only  furnished  the 
Bible  in  permanent  form  for  one  of  the  great  races  and 
laid  the  foundations  for  Eastern  Christianity,  but  also 
provided  the  linguistic  materials  for  the  widely  spread 
and  most  significant  Slavic  literatures.  As  would  be 
natural  at  the  time  when  the  translation  was  made  and 
in  the  environment  in  which  its  authors  lived,  the  version 
shows  dependence  on  the  Vulgate,  though  some  of  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  offer  evidence  that  they 
were  prepared  with  reference  to  the  Hebrew  and  a  knowl- 
edge of  its  value.  Very  likely  Cyril  and  Methodius  did 
not  cover  the  entire  Bible,  some  portions  being  trans- 
lated by  later  hands. 

Thus  we  sketch  the  growth  of  the  Bible  far  along  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  giving  some  attention  to  those  versions 
which  possess  any  considerable  importance— in  fact,  up 
to  the  period  which  paved  the  way  for  the  Reformation. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament, 
in  the  time  of  Moses,  or  earlier,  down  to  the  origin  of  the 


i8o  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Septuagint,  the  growth  of  the  Bible  was  likened,  appro- 
priately enough,  to  the  gathering  of  the  streams  out  of 
which  are  formed  a  great  river.  Then  the  comparison 
to  a  river  began  to  lose  its  appropriateness  and  its  force. 
In  place  of  the  assembling  of  streams  of  thought  the 
Scriptures  began  to  display  such  branching  as  is  charac- 
teristic of  the  growth  of  a  tree  rather  than  of  a  stream  of 
water,  and  that  growth  by  branching  has  repeatedly 
manifested  itself  in  the  versions  we  have  noticed;  and 
it  would  have  been  equally  evident  in  lesser  translations 
which  would  require  attention  if  the  survey  we  are  fol- 
lowing were  to  include  all  details  of  versions  that  ap- 
peared rather  than  merely  to  indicate  the  main  outlines 
of  development  as  evidence  of  the  natural  growth 
through  which  the  Bible  has  passed.  At  the  close  of  the 
Middle  Ages  then  the  Bible  stands  before  us  like  a  mighty 
oak,  its  roots  reaching  down  into  the  eternal  soils  of 
primitive  life,  its  main  trunk  of  divine  thought  strong  in 
the  Hebrew  and  Greek  fibers  of  the  original  Old  Testa- 
ment and  the  New,  its  great  branches  of  the  Septuagint, 
the  Vulgate,  and  the  Syriac  spreading  out  over  the  world, 
and,  forth  from  this  mighty  trunk  and  these  towering 
branches,  its  lesser  branches  that  we  have  looked  upon, 
and  those  smaller  ones  that  our  eyes  have  missed,  giving 
shade  and  comfort  to  a  world  of  human  life. 


CHAPTER  XIII 
MODERN  VERSIONS 

Modern  history  and  the  modern  world  have  their 
beginning  in  the  Renaissance,  that  period  of  new  interest 
in  classical  learning,  in  the  facts  of  Kfe,  and  in  man  him- 
self which  dates  from  the  fourteenth  century  and  had 
its  natural  fruit  in  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth. 
Through  the  long  earher  centuries  of  the  Middle  Ages 
Greek  was  almost  forgotten,  and  the  splendid  literature 
which  had  been  written  in  it  was  unknown  in  its  original 
form.  Hebrew  was  not  thought  of  outside  of  its  own 
Jewish  family  and  scattered  friends  here  and  there. 
Latin  was  the  general  language  of  the  Roman  world  and 
its  counterpart  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  but  it  was  not 
to  a  large  extent  the  speech  of  the  people.  They  used 
their  own  national,  or  racial,  tongues.  Otherwise  there 
would  not  have  been  occasion  for  the  Bible  transla- 
tions which  we  considered  in  chapter  xii  and  the  less 
significant  ones  which  we  have  passed  without  even 
mention. 

While  the  new  interest  in  learning  and  science  came 
to  have  immense  influence  on  religion  and  Christianity, 
that  was  not  the  purpose  of  those,  like  Petrarch,  who 
were  responsible  for  the  new  era  of  life.  These  leaders 
toward  a  new  day  were  concerned  in  learning,  in  classical 
thought  and  literature,  in  man,  and  in  the  world  of  na- 
ture, for  the  sake  of  the  worth  of  these  objects  of  study 
themselves.     The  works  of  Aristotle,  and  likewise  the 

i8i 


i82  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

stars  of  the  sky,  would  repay  in  their  own  study  the 
effort  which  was  required. 

Such  an  attitude  of  mind,  however,  must  inevitably 
have  its  effect  on  the  sources  of  religious  thought  and, 
in  the  end,  on  the  religious  life  itself.  Some  time  was 
needed,  but  the  effect  was  sure  to  come.  In  spite  of  the 
long  mental  drowsiness  of  the  Middle  Ages  the  shock  of 
contact  with  classical  life  and  power  must  produce  an 
awakening,  the  more  rude  perhaps  because  of  the  vast 
period  of  dulness  and  inactivity.  Christianity  could 
not  live  indefinitely  apart  from  learning  when  learning 
was  overcoming  the  world;  and  Christianity  with  learn- 
ing, like  the  world  itself,  must  become  new. 

This  new  world  of  Christianity  came  to  birth  in  the 
Reformation.  Its  counterpart  in  the  field  of  literature 
was  a  new  Bible.  With  this  last  aspect  of  the  new  world 
we  are  chiefly  concerned. 

There  is  no  birth  without  conception  and  the  pre- 
natal time  of  embryonic  growth  and  enrichment.  This 
is  as  true  in  the  things  of  the  spirit  as  in  the  life  of  the 
flesh;  it  is  as  true  in  the  literature  of  Christianity  as  it  is 
in  the  Christian  life  and  growth.  We  are  not  surprised 
then  to  discover  that  the  Bible  of  the  Reformation  was 
the  Bible  of  grace  and  strength;  and  it  is  equally  to  be 
expected  that  the  Reformation  Scriptures  have  their  con- 
ception in  the  generations  of  new  learning  out  of  which 
the  Reformation  was  born. 

Thus  it  was.  As  early  as  the  fourteenth  cent-ury  the 
riew  life  of  Bible  revision  began  to  make  itself  distinctly 
felt.  In  fact,  the  first  signs  of  vitality  may  be  traced 
farther  back,  just  as  there  were  promptings  of  the  Re- 
naissance before  Petrarch  and  his  followers  of  the  years 


MODERN  VERSIONS  183 

succeeding  1300.  Perhaps  it  would  be  more  correct, 
however,  to  call  those  first  movements  only  the  weakened 
extension  of  the  early  interest  in  Bible  translation  which 
we  have  already  studied,  recognizing  that  the  modern 
versions  have  a  real  beginning  with  the  promptings  re- 
ceived from  the  stimulus  of  the  revival  of  learning. 

However  the  matter  be  stated,  it  is  in  the  fourteenth 
and  following  centuries  that  we  discover  an  interest  in 
Bible  translation  and  in  the  use  of  these  vernacular  ver- 
sions such  as  had  never  before  displayed  itself  either  in 
degree  or  in  the  extent  of  the  countries  to  which  it 
reached.  It  is  worth  our  while  briefly  to  consider  some 
of  these  movements. 

The  most  important  of  these  movements  for  EngHsh 
readers,  and  one  of  the  most  significant  for  all  lovers  of 
the  Bible,  is  that  interwoven  into  the  life  and  service  of 
John  Wiclif,'  who  died  in  1384.  The  story  of  his"  eager- 
ness to  carry  the  gospel  to  the  common  people  of  England 
is  well  known.  In  this  endeavor  he  soon  found  that  the 
labors  of  himself  and  his  "poor  priests"  could  not  be 
effective  unless  the  Scriptures,  along  with  the  oral  mes- 
sage, should  be  given  to  the  people  for  whom  the  workers 
were  concerned.  The  next  step  was  to  make  transla- 
tions of  parts  of  the  Bible  from  the  Latin  into  the 
Enghsh  of  the  time.  Therefore  the  New  Testament  was 
translated  largely,  if  not  altogether,  by  Wiclif  himself, 
and  Nicholas  Hereford  and  others  completed  the  Old 
Testament.  This  was  naturally  the  Old  Testament 
of  the  Vulgate.  Indeed  Wiclif  and  his  co-workers  had 
no  thought  other  than  to  render  the  Latin  Vulgate  into 
the  speech  of  the  English  people,  the  interest  in  Hebrew 

'  Spelled  also  Wycliffe,  and  in  other  ways. 


i84  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

and  Greek  being  a  point  of  view  yet  to  develop  in  modern 
Christianity.  It  is  worth  while  to  note  also  that  the 
Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans,  which  we  have  found  in- 
cluded in  some  of  the  earlier  versions  or  collections,  still 
cherished  in  spite  of  Jerome  and  Augustine,  was  included 
among  the  books  which  Wiclif  was  concerned  to  render 
into  Enghsh,  though  it  was  soon  omitted  by  those  who 
continued  his  work. 

In  France,  pre-eminent  in  the  Renaissance  move- 
ment, desire  for  a  translation  of  the  Bible  into  the  lan- 
guage, or  rather  the  dialects,  of  the  people,  showed  itself 
before  the  fourteenth  century,  for  there  are  evidences 
that  the  entire  Bible,  the  Vulgate  of  course,  had  been 
carried  over  into  French  speech  not  long  after  the  year 
1 200,  thus  providing  for  the  need  of  the  people  as  early 
as  the  thirteenth  century.  In  the  fourteenth  other  ver- 
sions followed,  furnishing  those  who  were  desirous  of  the 
Scriptures  a  means  for  the  satisfaction  of  their  hunger. 
These  potent  activities  extended  their  influence  across 
the  Alps,  and  Italian  versions  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
or  earlier,  bearing  marks  of  relationship  to  the  French 
translations  but  put  into  the  speech  of  the  Italian  people, 
met  the  immediate  needs  and  paved  the  way  for  later 
and  better  versions. 

Spain  and  Portugal  also  experienced  the  efifect  of 
widespread  interest  in  the  popular  use  of  the  Scriptures. 
In  one  respect,  indeed,  they  were  well  favored.  Sit- 
uated near  the  Strait  of  Gibraltar,  where  Moslem  and 
Jewish  influence  from  Northern  Africa  had  made  them- 
selves felt,  the  people  of  these  two  countries  more  easily 
than  some  others  were  responsive  to  the  common  desire 
for  the  Bible  in  everyday  speech.    So  strong  had  the 


MODERN  VERSIONS  185 

inclination  in  this  way  been  in  the  earlier  days  that,  as 
far  back  as  1233,  in  Spain,  the  use  of  the  Bible  in  the 
common  language  of  the  people  had  been  prohibited. 
In  spite  of  these  hindrances,  however,  versions  appeared 
and  were  current  in  the  fourteenth  century,  some  of  them 
manifesting  in  marked  degree  the  influence  of  Jewish 
rabbis  who  had  become  concerned  to  bring  the  Scrip- 
tures, from  the  Jewish  point  of  view,  into  the  hands  of 
the  people. 

On  the  other  side  of  France,  to  the  north  and  east, 
the  situation  in  Holland  and  Germany  is  no  less  attrac- 
tive. As  early  as  the  year  1300,  it  is  thought,  a  version 
was  prepared  for  those  who  used  the  Flemish  tongue  in 
the  low  countries.  In  Germany  clear  evidence  of  still 
earlier  versions  has  been  found.  A  peculiarity  of  some 
of  these  translations  is  that  the  Latin  and  the  German 
of  the  time  are  placed  in  parallel  columns,  thus  furnish- 
ing the  benefit  of  both  versions  for  all  who  were  able  to 
use  both  languages.  Even  across  into  Scandinavia  in- 
terest in  popular  reading  of  the  Bible  arose,  and  there 
are  traces  of  a  Swedish  translation  of  parts  of  the  Scrip- 
tures before  the  fourteenth  century  had  closed. 

In  other  parts  of  Europe,  before  the  year  1400,  and 
thus  belonging  to  the  fourteenth  century,  there  are  traces 
of  portions  of  the  Bible  carried  into  the  popular  speech. 
Mention  of  the  popular  interest  which  displayed  itself 
in  Bohemia  particularly,  culminating  in  the  unique  serv- 
ice and  the  martyrdom  of  John  Hus,  in  141 5,  may  well 
be  made. 

All  of  these  translations,  except  where  Jewish  influ- 
ence has  been  noted,  were  prepared,  naturally,  from  the 
Vulgate ;  and  this  tells  at  once  the  contents  of  the  Bible 


1 86  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

which  was  translated,  either  in  whole  or,  as  probably 
often  occurred,  in  part,  the  Gospels  and  the  Psalms 
being  the  portions  receiving  first  attention,  just  as  has 
been  the  case  in  modern  missionary  activities. 

The  foundations  for  modern  versions  of  the  Bible 
having  been  so  deeply  and  so  broadly  laid  in  the 
fourteenth  century,  we  need  not  be  surprised  that  the 
fifteenth  manifests  a  different  type  of  activity.  Trans- 
lations being  already  in  existence,  those  who  were  con- 
cerned with  their  use  and  improvement  found  revision 
easier  than  retranslation.  There  is  the  possibility  too 
that  the  abounding  energy  which  produced  the  four- 
teenth-century versions  did  not  exist,  at  least  did  not 
exist  in  the  same  form,  during  the  next  generations.  In 
any  case,  go  in  what  direction  we  will  for  an  explanation, 
the  fifteenth  century  was  not  fruitful  in  efforts  to  bring 
the  Bible  into  the  language  of  people  who  theretofore 
had  been  without  it  in  their  own  tongue.  It  did  well, 
in  fact,  to  cherish  and  maintain  the  versions  bequeathed 
by  its  predecessor. 

The  fifteenth  century  was  notable  in  another  way. 
It  was  the  period  out  of  which  came  the  invention  of 
printing  and  the  multiplication  of  copies  of  the  Bible,  as 
well  as  of  other  books,  to  a  degree  not  dreamed  of  hith- 
erto; and  the  Bible,  of  course,  was  one  of  the  volumes 
earliest  to  gain  from  the  new  art.  Before  the  year  1500 
several  of  the  versions  made  and  slightly  circulated  in 
manuscript  in  the  fourteenth  century  were  much  more 
widely  and  easily  available  because  the  printer  had  re- 
leased the  Scriptures  from  the  limitations  of  the  pen. 

The  sixteenth  was  the  century  of  the  Reformation 
and  of  upheaval  in  translations  of  the  Bible.    The 


MODERN  VERSIONS  187 

leaven  of  learning  had  been  working,  and  the  bread  of 
life  in  new  form  must  appear.  It  appeared  in  England 
and  on  the  Continent;  the  peoples  of  varied  speech  re- 
ceived the  old  message  in  new  words,  in  language  familiar 
to  their  ears  and  welcome  to  their  hearts.  In  the  coming 
of  this  new  Bible,  as  in  the  coming  of  the  entire  move- 
ment of  the  Reformation,  Luther  and  Germany  were 
the  leaders,  and  the  progress  there  is  entitled  to  first 
attention. 

We  date  the  Reformation  from  October,  1517,  when 
Luther  nailed  his  ninety-five  theses  on  the  chapel  door 
at  Wittenberg.  Important  events  followed  fast.  Out 
of  these  Luther  learned  quickly  that  the  new  message 
he  was  taking  to  the  people  must  be  supported  by 
printed  copies  of  the  Scriptures  to  which  he  was  appeal- 
ing. This  meant  new  translations  of  portions  of  the 
Bible  in  the  fresh  and  vigorous  German  of  which  he  was 
a  master.  Such  translation  of  parts  of  the  Psalms,  the 
Decalogue,  the  Lord 's  Prayer,  and  portions  of  the  Gos- 
pels and  epistles  were  brought  to  their  natural  fruitage 
with  the  appearance  of  a  new  version  of  the  entire  New 
Testament  in  September,  1522.  Even  before  that  Lu- 
ther had  conceived  of  a  new  version  of  the  entire  Bible, 
and  his  dream  was  brought  to  realization  with  the  print- 
ing of  the  whole  Bible  in  1534. 

Luther's  translation  was  made  on  the  basis  of  the 
Hebrew  for  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Greek  for  the 
New.  This  attitude  toward  the  Bible  writings  had  not 
before  been  taken,  at  least  with  any  thoroughness,  since 
the  time  of  Jerome;  and  even  he,  as  we  have  observed, 
deferred  in  some  degree  to  the  feeling  of  his  friends,  who 
had  come  to  cherish  the  larger  collection  of  sacred  books 


1 88  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

as  received  from  the  Septuagint.  Luther,  as  might  be 
expected  from  his  vigorous  and  unyielding  temper,  was 
more  determined  and  consistent.  Though  he  did  not 
discard  the  Old  Testament  books  not  found  in  the  He- 
brew, he  brought  non-Hebrew  writings  into  a  separate 
collection,  and  they  were  printed  as  a  middle  portion  of 
the  Bible  between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New,  with 
the  title 

Apocrypha,  that  is  books  which  are  not  held  equal  to  the 
sacred  Scriptures,  and  nevertheless  are  useful  and  good  to  read. 

In  taking  this  position  Luther  had  undoubtedly  been 
influenced  by  a  work  of  Andreas  Bodenstein  von  Carl- 
stadt,  published  in  1520,  in  which  he  had  reviewed  the 
discussions  of  Jerome  and  Augustine  and  had  inclined 
to  the  idea  of  Jerome,  carrying  that  idea  even  farther 
than  Jerome  had  done. 

The  translation  of  Luther  is  notable  in  two  respects. 
It  had  furnished  a  new  arrangement  of  the  books  of  the 
Bible,  with  a  depreciation  of  the  worth  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment writings  not  found  in  Hebrew,  and  it  had  carried 
the  thought  of  the  Bible  over  into  such  remarkable  Ger- 
man diction  as  to  make  that  version  almost  the  only 
German  Bible  for  generations  and  to  give  a  new  uni- 
formity and  fixity  to  German  speech. 

The  Luther  version  of  the  Bible  is  significant  for  its 
influence  outside  of,  as  well  as  within,  Germany,  The 
people  of  Holland  were  kindred  in  both  race  and  lan- 
guage and  were  near  at  hand.  The  work  of  Luther  and 
his  colaborers  appealed  to  them  with  force  and  zest, 
and  a  Dutch  Bible,  in  the  language  of  the  people  of  the 
day,  appeared  at  the  same  period  as  Luther's  version  in 


MODERN  VERSIONS  189 

Germany,  beginning  in  1522  and  being  completed  in 
1532.  The  labor  was  hastily  performed,  the  need  of 
revision  was  soon  felt,  and  the  Bible,  with  such  changes 
included,  was  issued  in  1536.  Into  Denmark  and  Swe- 
den also  the  enterprise  of  Luther  was  carried,  and  the 
Bible  appeared  in  new  dress.  In  Denmark  the  New 
Testament  was  published  in  1524,  and  the  entire  Bible 
was  completed  as  early  as  1550.  Sweden  felt  the  new 
impetus  almost  as  soon  for  the  New  Testament  and  more 
quickly  for  the  Old,  a  Swedish  version  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament strongly  controlled  by  the  language  of  Luther 
issuing  in  1526,  and  of  the  Old  Testament  as  early  as  154 1. 
Even  in  more  remote  Hungary,  though  not  so  directly 
an  outgrowth  of  the  version  of  Luther  and  retarded  in 
time,  a  sixteenth-century  translation,  highly  important 
for  the  Protestant  movement,  came  to  light.  It  was 
the  work  of  Kaspar  Karolyi,  issuing  in  1589-90,  and 
was  so  valuable  that  it  is  still  used  among  the  Hun- 
garian people.  In  Russia  also,  as  early  as  1581,  a  new 
version  appeared,  related  in  origin,  however,  to  the  early 
Slavic.  And  in  Poland  even  sooner,  in  1561,  there  was 
published  a  new  version  of  the  entire  Bible,  various 
translations  of  portions  of  the  Scriptures  having  been 
issued  during  the  previous  years  since  1500. 

To  the  west,  in  France,  the  course  of  events  was 
different.  France  and  Germany  have  never  pursued 
kindred  lines  of  development  nor  found  similar  avenues 
of  progress  congenial.  This  diversity  of  development 
was  true  in  the  use  of  the  Bible.  The  eft'ect  of  the  new 
learning  manifested  itself  in  its  own  way  for  the  French 
people.  In  the  translation  of  the  Bible  it  began  with 
the  very  important  work  of  Le  Fevre  d'Etaples,  who, 


I  go  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

within  the  years  1523  to  1530,  brought  out  a  new  version 
of  the  Vulgate,  thus  indicating  a  conservative  attitude 
toward  the  ancient  collection  of  Scripture  writings  at  the 
same  time  that  the  need  of  a  new  translation  was  recog- 
nized. 

The  Protestant  leaven  was  at  work,  however,  in 
France  as  well  as  among  the  Germanic  and  kindred 
peoples,  and  in  1535  Olive  tan  published  a  version  from 
the  Protestant  point  of  view.  It  was  particularly  val- 
uable in  the  case  of  the  Old  Testament,  both  in  its  faith- 
fulness to  the  Hebrew  and  in  the  literary  qualities  of 
the  French,  so  that  it  has  become  a  basis  for  later 
versions. 

In  Italy  too  the  force  of  the  new  Scripture  ideas  was 
felt.  Florence,  the  foster-mother  of  liberty  in  spite  of 
papal  power,  furnished  the  labors  of  Brucioli,  who  as 
early  as  1528  began  the  work  of  translation,  and  the 
New  Testament  was  published  at  Venice  in  1530.  The 
Psalms  followed  the  next  year,  and  the  new  version  of 
the  Bible  was  completed  in  1532,  the  Old  Testament 
finding  dependence  on  the  Hebrew  and  the  New  on  the 
Greek. 

While  we  think  of  Germany  as  the  first  home  of  the 
Reformation  and  give  honor  to  Luther  as  the  first  to 
bring  the  Bible  from  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  to  the  peo- 
ple in  a  modern  form  of  speech  which  has  retained  its 
hold  to  the  present  day,  a  corresponding  movement 
among  the  EngUsh-speaking  people  was  not  far  behind, 
and  the  Bible  in  English  as  a  translation  from  the  origi- 
nal tongues  of  the  Scriptures  did  not  tarry  long.  The 
leaven  of  Europe  was  working  as  surely  in  Britain  as 
among  the  Teutonic  nations.     For  the  English-speaking 


MODERN  VERSIONS  191 

world  of  today  this  British  activity  has  its  own  peculiar 
interest,  power,  and  charm. 

British  activity  in  the  remaking  of  the  form  of  the 
Bible,  as  is  well  known,  dates  from  the  labors  of  William 
Tindale,'  who  was  born  sometime  before  1490  and  paid 
the  price  of  his  devotion  to  the  Bible  by  martyrdom 
in  1536.  The  path  which  he  trod,  therefore,  was  less 
smooth  even  than  that  over  which  Luther  had  to  pass. 
The  obstacles  before  the  reformers  in  England  were  far 
greater  than  those  in  Germany,  the  English  people, 
or  rather  the  English  rulers  and  ruling  classes,  moving 
more  slowly  than  the  Germans,  with  whom  Luther  and 
his  friends  had  immediately  to  deal. 

In  their  devotion  to  the  original  languages  of  the 
Scriptures,  Luther  and  Tindale  were  alike,  and  both 
gave  attention  first  to  the  New  Testament.  Luther's 
labors  came  to  fruitage  a  little  earlier,  in  1522,  as  we  have 
seen,  Tindale 's  translation  of  the  New  Testament  from 
the  Greek,  the  first  New  Testament  in  English  brought 
over  directly  from  the  Greek,  being  printed  in  1525, 
coming  then  from  presses  in  Germany,  because  his  na- 
tive land  would  not  tolerate  his  epoch-making  service. 
The  remaining  eleven  years  of  his  life  he  spent  chiefly, 
if  not  altogether,  on  the  Continent,  much  of  the  time 
at  Hamburg  and  Antwerp,  working  constantly  on  the 
translation  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  revision  of  the 
New,  and  having  the  satisfaction  of  seeing  both  appear 
from  the  press  before  he  was  trapped  by  his  ignoble 
enemies  and  sacrificed  on  the  altar  of  blind  tradition. 
His  work,  however,  could  not  be  undone,  and  he  has  the 
enduring  glory  of  bringing  the  New  Testament  directly 

'  Also  spelled  Tyndale,  and  in  other  ways. 


192  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

from  the  Greek  fountains  over  to  the  lasting  use  of  the 
English-speaking  world. 

By  one  of  the  curious  ironies  of  history,  the  same 
year,  1535,  in  which  Tindale  was  arrested  and  impris- 
oned, saw  the  printing  of  the  so-called  Bible  of  Cover- 
dale,  who  suffered  no  such  penalties  as  had  come  to 
Tindale,  the  shifting  of  the  scenes  of  prejudice  having 
combined  more  to  his  favor.  For  us  the  chief  interest 
perhaps  of  this  Bible  is  the  treatment  which  Coverdale 
gave  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  which  were  not 
found  to  exist  in  Hebrew.  Here  he  followed  the  exam- 
ple of  Luther,  or,  if  it  was  not  the  attitude  of  Luther 
which  controlled  him,  at  least  he  did  the  same  thing, 
collecting  these  books  together  between  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  the  New.  He  was  careful  also  to  give  his 
reasons  for  so  doing.  He  spoke  of  these  writings  as 
*'the  books  and  treatises  which  among  the  fathers  of  old 
are  not  reckoned  to  be  of  like  authority  with  the  other 
books  of  the  Bible,  neither  are  they  found  in  the  canon 
of  the  Hebrew."  He  thought  it  well,  however,  to  re- 
tain Baruch  "among  the  prophets  next  unto  Jeremiah, 
because  he  was  his  scribe  and  in  his  time."  Later  edi- 
tions of  the  English  Bible,  however,  have  placed  Baruch 
among  those  not  found  in  the  Hebrew. 

Thus  we  have  come  to  the  time  in  the  history  of  the 
Bible,  both  on  the  Continent  of  Europe  and  in  Great 
Britain,  when  there  was  not  only  a  decision  to  give 
superior  authority  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
found  in  the  Hebrew  but  also  a  definite  movement  to 
separate  the  non-Hebrew  books  from  the  others  and 
print  them  by  themselves  between  the  Old  Testament 
and  the  New,  and  to  give  them  the  general  title  Apoc- 


MODERN  VERSIONS  193 

rypha.  The  word  itself  is  suggestive  and  has  a  con- 
siderable history  of  its  own.  That  history  would  be 
attractive  to  review,  but  it  is  not  essential  and  must  be 
passed  over,  merely  noting  that  the  term  means  con- 
cealed, or  hidden,  and  that  it  came  to  designate  books 
which  were  regarded  and  treated  differently  from 
others;  in  the  case  of  the  Bible,  those  writings  which 
were  regarded  unfavorably  when  considering  the  ques- 
tion whether  a  writing  should  be  included  among  the  fully 
sacred  books.  In  this  connection  it  is  worthy  of  notice 
that  at  Zurich,  Switzerland,  in  1529-30,  a  Bible  was 
printed  in  which  the  Apocrypha  was  placed  at  the  close, 
after  the  New  Testament.  This  of  course  was  due  to  the 
influence  of  the  work  of  Luther,  except  that  those  who 
were  responsible  for  this  particular  edition  of  the  Bible 
went  to  the  extreme  and  put  the  secondary  books  in  the 
most  subordinate  position  they  could  discover  while 
retaining  them  at  all.  As  this  position  was  manifestly 
unhistorical,  it  could  not  maintain  itself  and  was  not 
continued. 

The  years  following  1535  saw  one  English  Protestant 
Bible  after  another  appear  and  claim  attention.  There 
was  the  so-called  Matthews  Bible  in  1537,  the  Tavenner 
in  1539,  the  Great  Bible  as  the  result  of  various  workers 
in  the  same  year,  the  Geneva  Bible  in  1560,  and  the 
Bishops  in  1568.  Each  possesses  its  own  individual 
interest  and  in  any  detailed  history  of  the  English  Bible 
would  require  appropriate  description.  For  us,  in  the 
present  study,  the  chief  significance  of  these  several 
slightly  variant  translations  is  to  observe  how  closely 
they  followed  each  other,  feel  the  biblical  unrest  which 
this  situation  betokens  for  the  English  Christians  of 


194  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

that  period,  and  remember  that  the  Geneva  version, 
the  most  important  of  the  hst,  was  made  by  English 
exiles  in  Switzerland  and  came  to  have  wide  acceptance 
and  potent  influence  among  the  people  in  Britain  itself, 
as  well  as  no  mean  place  in  determining  the  language 
which  still  later  EngHsh  versions  have  used. 

During  this  period  the  Church  of  England  took  im- 
portant action  bearing  on  the  acceptance  of  biblical 
writings,  action  which  serves  well  to  disclose  the  English 
thought  of  the  time  concerning  the  books  of  the  Bible 
and  to  show  how  the  labors  which  resulted  in  the  above- 
mentioned  versions  were  tending  toward  a  crystalHzation 
of  views  concerning  the  manner  in  which  the  several 
books  should  be  esteemed.  This  action  was  the  formu- 
lation and  adoption  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  re- 
ligion of  the  English  church.  In  their  Latin  form  they 
were  recognized  in  1562.  To  make  them  more  accessible, 
yet  without  change  of  their  binding  character,  they 
were  recognized  in  English  form  by  the  convocation  of 
1 57 1.  Of  the  thirty-nine  different  articles,  the  sixth 
deals  with  the  names  of  the  books  of  the  Bible  and  the 
way  in  which  they  are  to  be  accepted.  In  treating  *'of 
the  sufficiency  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  for  salvation" 
there  is  given  a  hst  "of  the  names  and  number  of  the 
canonical  books,"  which  includes  the  ordinary  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  after  which  the  article  continues: 

And  the  other  books  (as  Hierome  saith)  the  Church  doth 
read  for  example  of  life  and  instruction  of  manners;  but  yet 
doth  it  not  apply  them  to  establish  any  doctrine;  such  are  these 
following:  The  Third  Book  of  Esdras,  The  Fourth  Book  of 
Esdras,  The  Book  of  Tobias,  The  Book  of  Judith,  The  Rest 
of  the  Book  of  Esther,  The  Book  of  Wisdom,  Jesus  the  Son  of 


MODERN  VERSIONS  195 

Sirach,  Baruch  the  Prophet,  The  Song  of  the  Three  Children, 
The  Story  of  Susanna,  Of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  The  Prayer  of 
Manasses,  The  First  Book  of  Maccabees,  The  Second  Book  of 
Maccabees. 

Thus  the  view  of  Jerome  and  the  tendency  of  the  Prot- 
estant thought  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  given  offi- 
cial recognition  by  the  controlling  ecclesiastical  authority 
of  the  English  people  of  the  period.  The  books  which 
were  beginning  to  be  called  the  Apocrypha  were  retained 
as  part  of  the  Bible  but  separated  by  themselves  and 
assigned  to  a  subordinate  place  of  esteem. 

One  more  English  version  of  .the  sixteenth  century 
commands  our  careful  consideration.  Like  the  Genevan, 
it  was  produced  by  EngHsh-speaking  people  while  in 
exile.  As  Protestants  had  been  forced  to  leave  England 
during  the  reign  of  Mary,  1553-58,  and  before  their 
return  made  the  Genevan  Bible,  so  in  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  1 558-1603,  Catholics  fled  to  foreign  lands, 
especially  to  France,  in  order  to  escape  the  EHzabethan 
persecutions,  and  while  thus  deprived  of  their  homes 
prepared  the  Catholic  version  which  ordinarily  bears 
the  name  of  the  Douay  Bible. 

To  understand  the  importance  of  the  Douay  version 
it  is  necessary  to  recall  the  action  of  the  Council  of  Trent, 
in  1546,  which  has  already  been  mentioned  (p.  166). 
The  decree  then  adopted  by  the  Council  made  the  Vul- 
gate the  supreme  form  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Bible. 
The  action  was  the  natural  outcome,  as  may  now  be 
readily  seen,  of  the  decision  of  Luther  and  Coverdale 
and  others  of  the  Protestant  leaders  to  separate  the  non- 
Hebrew  writings  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  Hebrew 
and  place  them  in  a  subordinate  status,  as  Luther  had 


196  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

done  in  1534  and  Coverdale  a  year  later.  The  Catholic 
church,  long  an  advocate  of  the  authority  of  the  church 
and  its  usages,  long  accustomed  to  exalt  the  authority 
of  the  early  church  leaders  like  Augustine  and  Jerome, 
particularly  those,  like  Augustine,  who  had  elevated 
tradition  into  the  place  of  truth,  reacted  naturally 
against  the  assumptions  of  Luther,  Tindale,  Coverdale, 
and  their  followers,  and  declared  that  the  same  books 
which  had  been  used  through  the  centuries  should  con- 
tinue to  be  used  and,  from  1546  on,  should  be  stamped 
with  a  definite  and  inevitable  right  to  be  heard,  read,  and 
obeyed. 

For  English-speaking  Catholics  then  the  Vulgate 
must  be  the  ultimate  authority  as  the  Bible,  and  any 
translation  into  English  must  grow  out  of  that  Vulgate 
edition.  The  Douay  Bible  accordingly  is  an  English 
version  of  the  Latin  Vulgate,  including  all  that  the  Vul- 
gate includes,  arranging  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
in  the  Vulgate  order,  and  altogether  reproducing  the 
official  Catholic  Latin  Vulgate  in  English  as  faithfully  as 
the  translators  were  able  to  perform  this  sacred  service. 

The  work  of  the  translators  was  completed  as  early 
as  1582.  Only  part  of  the  money  necessary  to  print  the 
entire  Bible  was  available.  Preference  was  naturally 
given  to  the  New  Testament,  and  this  appeared  that 
year,  being  printed  at  Rheims,  France.  The  full  title 
is  significant: 

The  New  Testament  of  Jesus  Christ,  translated  faithfully 
into  English  out  of  the  authentical  Latin,  according  to  the  best 
corrected  copies  of  the  same,  diligently  conferred  with  the  Greek 
and  other  editions  in  divers  languages:  with  Arguments  of  books 
and  chapters,  annotations,  and  other  necessary  helps,  for  the 


MODERN  VERSIONS  197 

better  understanding  of  the  text,  and  specially  for  the  discovery 
of  the  Corruptions  of  divers  late  translations,  and  for  clearing 
the  Controversies  in  religion,  of  these  days. 

Thus  the  translators  not  only  furnished  an  English  ver- 
sion suitable  for  the  use  of  English  Catholics  but  also 
warned  the  readers  of  the  Protestant  version  how  the 
versions  placed  in  their  hands  could  not  be  trusted. 
That  there  was  some  basis  for  this  warning  will  appear 
as  we  go  on  to  consider  what  English  Protestants  did 
within  a  generation  to  improve  the  Bible  in  the  hands  of 
Enghsh  readers. 

Before  we  take  that  further  step  one  or  two  more 
aspects  of  the  Douay  Bible  and  its  meaning  should  be 
noticed.  The  New  Testament  having  appeared  in  1582, 
lack  of  funds  prevented  the  pubHcation  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament until  1609-10,  when  it  was  issued  in  two  vol- 
umes at  Douay,  France,  from  which  place  and  from  the 
CathoHc  college  located  there  the  name  of  the  version 
is  derived.  The  complete  publication  of  this  version 
accordingly  carries  us  along  into  the  beginning  of  the 
seventeenth  century. 

The  point  we  have  thus  reached  in  a  brief  sketch  of 
the  origin  of  the  CathoHc  Bible  in  EngUsh,  when  the 
facts  considered  are  related  to  those  of  the  growth  of  the 
Bible  as  a  whole,  and  particularly  to  those  coimected  with 
the  Protestant  versions,  is  an  opportune  moment  to 
clear  up  the  oft-recurring  question  of  the  relation  between 
the  Enghsh  CathoHc  Bible  and  the  Protestant  Bibles. 
Probably,  after  what  has  already  been  said,  Httle  more, 
if  anything,  is  needed.  The  reader  has  discovered  that 
>he  differences  between  the  Bible  of  the  Protestants  and 
the  Bible  of  the  CathoHcs  are  the  outcome  of  centuries 


1 98  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

of  Bible  development,  in  the  course  of  which  there  was 
opportunity  for  variation  of  opinion  as  to  what  the  Bible 
should  be,  and  actual  difference  of  opinion  disclosed 
itself.  In  the  early  days  of  the  Christian  Era  the  ques- 
tion arose  as  to  whether  the  larger  collection  of  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  or  essentially  that,  should  be  received  for  the 
Old  Testament,  or  whether  the  Hebrew  only  should  be 
approved.  Augustine  and  the  ecclesiastically  inclined 
preferred  the  larger  collection,  and  it  continued  to  be 
used  as  the  hberal-minded  Jews  had  used  it  before. 
During  the  more  than  one  thousand  years  from  Augus- 
tine to  the  Reformation  Uttle  further  thought  was  be- 
stowed on  the  question.  When  the  reformers  assumed 
to  return  to  the  view  of  Jerome  and  to  the  authority  of 
the  Hebrew  Bible,  the  long-estabHshed  and  self-assured 
Catholic  church,  inevitably  from  a  historical  point  of 
view,  confirmed  and  proclaimed  the  authority  of  the 
larger  collection,  in  the  order  and  in  the  form  and  lan- 
guage in  which  it  had  long  been  used.  When  an  Enghsh 
version  of  the  Bible  was  prepared  for  CathoUcs,  at  the 
close  of  the  sixteenth  century,  after  the  decree  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  it  could  not  be  anything  else  than  a 
translation  of  the  larger  collection,  the  official  Vulgate. 
Thus,  as  naturally  from  a  historical  point  of  view  as 
anything  could  occur,  the  CathoHc  Bible  differs  from  the 
Protestant  widely  in  content,  in  arrangement,  and  in 
the  choice  of  language  to  express  the  thought  of  the 
original  tongues  of  the  Scriptures  themselves. 

We  have  now  sketched  the  most  important  of  the 
versions  of  the  sixteenth  century.  It  would  be  quite 
incorrect,  however,  to  leave  any  impression  that  all  the 
versions  of  that  period  have  been  noticed.     Particularly 


MODERN  VERSIONS  199 

it  would  be  unfair  to  suggest  that  the  Douay  Bible  was 
the  only  Catholic  version  in  the  language  of  the  people 
of  the  time.  Highly  important  as  this  Bible  was  for  its 
own  period  and  as  it  has  been  for  succeeding  generations 
of  the  English-speaking  world,  it  by  no  means  covers  the 
translation  of  the  Bible  into  the  vernacular  of  the  various 
Catholic  peoples  in  the  large  realm  of  the  Christian 
world  as  a  whole.  Some  of  those  that  appeared  in  other 
languages  than  Enghsh  may  be  briefly  mentioned. 

In  France  the  version  of  Le  Fevre  d'Etaples,  already 
referred  to,  was  revised  in  the  interest  of  Cathohc  views 
and  issued  at  Lou  vain  in  1550.  Italy,  of  course,  was 
tardy  in  receiving  the  Scriptures  in  the  speech  of  the 
people,  but  the  prohibition  of  the  use  of  such  versions  by 
Pius  IV  in  1564,  a  decree  which  remained  in  effect  till 
1757,  reveals  the  fact  that  vernacular  versions  were  prob- 
ably in  use  in  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and 
the  Pope 's  action  was  taken  to  stop  the  further  reading  of 
them.  In  Germany  several  CathoHc  translations  ap- 
peared in  efforts  to  counteract  the  tremendous  influence 
of  the  version  of  Luther.  As  early  as  1526,  only  four 
years  after  Luther 's  New  Testament  was  issued,  a  Cath- 
olic New  Testament  was  published,  followed  by  another 
in  the  next  year,  and  by  the  entire  Bible  in  1534;  and  in 
1537  Eck,  the  noted  antagonist  of  Luther,  brought  out 
the  whole  Bible  in  still  another  edition.  Holland  also, 
for  the  CathoHcs  as  for  the  Protestants,  followed  the 
example  of  Germany,  a  Dutch  Catholic  New  Testament 
appearing  in  1527,  a  Latin-Dutch  in  parallel  columns 
in  1539,  and  a  complete  Bible  in  1548.  Even  in  Poland 
the  CathoHcs  felt  the  need  of  counteracting  the  Protes- 
tant movement  by  issuing  a  Catholic  version  of  the 


200  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

Scriptures,  a  Polish  version  of  the  Bible  being  pub- 
lished in  1561  and  a  more  important  edition  in  1599. 

In  the  seventeenth  century  the  most  significant  prog- 
ress in  Bible  translation  occurred  in  England.  This 
was  the  outgrowth  probably  of  two  or  three  factors  of 
the  EngHsh  situation.  For  one  thing,  the  versions  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  as  suggested  above  (p.  197),  had 
given  no  such  satisfaction  to  English  readers  as  the  work 
of  Luther  had  furnished  to  the  Germans.  Then  too 
the  Reformation  had  advanced  much  more  slowly  in 
England  than  on  the  Continent,  but  through  the  activi- 
ties of  the  Puritans  it  was  making  permanent  gain,  and 
the  need  of  a  version  of  the  Bible  responsive  to  that  gain 
was  widely  felt.  Still  further,  the  new  king,  James  I, 
was  flattered  with  the  proposition  that  he  become  the 
patron  of  such  a  translation  of  the  Bible  as  the  English 
people  ought  to  have. 

This  idea  was  presented  to  the  king  soon  after  he 
came  to  the  throne  in  1603.  He  responded  favorably, 
and  a  company  of  learned  divines  was  selected  to  under- 
take the  work.  Without  going  into  the  details  of  this 
enterprise,  which  have  been  so  often  told  and  are  easily 
available  in  the  standard  books,  it  is  sufficient  here  to 
recall  that  out  of  the  situation  as  it  was  came  the  King 
James,  or  Authorized,  Version  of  the  Bible,  which  was 
published  in  161 1  and  has  remained  until  the  present  day 
not  only  the  chief  Bible  used  in  Great  Britain  and  the 
United  States  but  also  the  Scriptures  as  they  have  been 
carried  wherever  English  colonization  and  English- 
speaking  missionary  efforts  have  entered  in  the  making 
of  the  modern  world.  At  last  a  version  of  the  Bible  had 
appeared    which   performed   for   the   EngUsh-speaking 


MODERN  VERSIONS  201 

peoples  that  which  had  been  done  by  Luther  for  the 
Germans. 

The  version  was  made,  of  course,  from  the  Hebrew 
of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Greek  of  the  New.  The 
Apocrypha  was  retained,  but,  in  accord  with  the  act 
of  convocation  in  1571,  quoted  above  (p.  194),  it  was 
placed  as  a  separate  collection  between  the  two  Testa- 
taments,  where  it  has  remained  in  those  editions  of  the 
Protestant  English  Bible  which  have  printed  it  at  all. 
Some  editions  in  the  years  immediately  following,  and 
many  more  in  recent  times,  have  appeared  with  the 
Apocr3^ha  entirely  omitted. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  in- 
fluence of  the  EngHsh  authorities  was  opposed  to  omit- 
ting the  Apocrypha,  and  action  prohibiting  its  omission 
was  taken  in  161 5.  This  severe  attitude,  however,  did 
not  long  continue,  and  as  early  as  1629  the  Authorized 
Version  was  printed  without  the  Apocr3^ha.  The 
growing  disfavor  of  the  Apocrypha  came  from  the  op- 
position of  the  Puritans  and  the  increase  of  Presbyte- 
rianism  and  showed  itself  in  definite  action  when  the 
Westminster  Confession  was  adopted  in  1648,  in  which 
it  was  declared  that  the  books  of  the  Apocrypha, 

not  being  of  divine  inspiration,  are  no  part  of  the  canon  of  the 
scripture;  and  therefore  are  of  no  authority  in  the  church  of 
God,  nor  to  be  in  any  otherwise  approved,  or  made  use  of,  than 
other  human  writings. 

This  severe  decision  was  doubtless  a  reaction  in  some 
measure  against  the  view  of  the  Apocrypha  accepted  by 
the  Church  of  England  in  1571  and  continuously  main- 
tained since  that  time.     It  discloses  the  two  estimates 


202  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

which  were  entertained  in  the  British  dominions.  Grad- 
ually, in  spite  of  the  attitude  of  the  Church  of  England, 
the  opposition  to  the  Apocrypha  increased,  and  in  1827 
the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society  decided  to  exclude 
the  Apocrypha  from  all  its  publications  after  that  date. 

Having  thus  passed  for  a  moment  beyond  the  Hmits 
of  the  seventeenth  century  in  order  to  note  the  experi- 
ence through  which  the  Apocrypha  passed,  we  may  now 
return  to  the  years  following  1600  and  consider  briefly 
some  other  versions  of  that  century  which  are  important 
for  our  survey. 

One  of  the  most  significant  Bibles  belonging  to  the 
same  period  as  the  Authorized  Version  is  the  translation 
which  appeared  in  Italy  as  the  outcome  of  the  labors  of 
Diodati.  It  was  a  Protestant  enterprise  and  appeared 
in  1607,  four  years  earher  than  the  King  James  Version. 
So  well  done  was  the  work  that  it  is  still  the  ordinary 
Bible  in  use  among  the  Protestants  of  Italy.  In  Por- 
tugal also,  before  the  close  of  the  century,  a  version  in  the 
language  of  the  people  appeared.  It  was  the  work  of 
John  Ferreira  d  'Almeida  who,  after  serving  as  a  Catholic 
missionary,  embraced  the  Protestant  view  and  devoted 
himself  to  the  translation  of  a  version  of  the  Bible  which 
was  published,  with  the  co-operation  of  others,  the  New 
Testament  in  1681  and  the  completed  Bible  in  the 
eighteenth  century  (1751). 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  see  that  the  labor  of  ren- 
dering the  Bible  into  the  languages  of  the  modern  world 
had  largely  been  performed  before  the  year  1700.  Re- 
visions have  been  made  since  that  time,  some  of  them 
important.  Particularly  for  the  English  reader  the 
revision  which  was  begun  in  1870,  resulting  in  the  publi- 


MODERN  VERSIONS  203 

cation  of  the  New  Testament  in  188 1  and  the  Old  in  1885, 
with  its  still  further  revision  by  American  scholars  and 
publication  in  1901,  is  highly  important.  The  fact  that 
in  the  plans  for  the  version  the  Apocrypha  was  practi- 
cally forgotten  until  1872,  when  the  arrangements  for  the 
printing  of  the  Bible  by  the  Universities  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge  led  to  an  agreement  to  pubhsh  the  Apocrypha 
separately,  is  itself  significant  of  recent  opinion.  For  the 
ordinary  Protestant  reader  of  the  Bible  the  Apocrypha 
has  no  place.  Such  is  the  change  which  has  come  about 
in  one  great  branch  of  the  Christian  world  since  the  up- 
heaval of  the  Reformation. 

It  should  be  added  that  the  Apocrypha  has  gained 
in  another  way  what  it  has  lost  for  the  common  reader. 
In  it  those  who  desire  to  learn  the  story  of  the  sacred 
writings  of  Christendom  as  a  whole  find  some  of  the 
most  valuable  data  for  their  use.  Recognizing  the  close 
relationship  between  the  Apocrypha  and  the  Old  Tes- 
tament and  the  kinship  which  Jewish  apocalyptic  lit- 
erature has  to  both,  students  of  Judaism  and  early 
Christianity  find  in  these  writings  a  storehouse  of  mate- 
rial out  of  which  to  discover  and  write  the  history  of  the 
religion  of  Israel  and  the  beginning  of  the  growth  of 
Christianity.  Thus  the  Apocrypha  has  not  been  lost, 
and  is  not  likely  to  be  lost,  to  the  life  and  furtherance 
of  the  Christian  religion. 

The  story  of  the  versions  of  the  Bible  has  by  no 
means  been  told  with  completeness.  Nothing  has  been 
said  of  the  recent  translations  for  carrying  the  Scrip- 
tures to  the  Indians  of  North  America,  begun  as  far 
back  as  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  by  the 
pioneer  missionary  John  Eliot;  of  the  translations  that 


204  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

have  accompanied  and  supported  the  missionary  enter- 
prises in  Asia,  Africa,  and  the  islands  of  the  sea;  or  of 
the  very  recent  so-called  modern  translations  intended 
to  place  the  thought  of  the  Bible  in  the  Enghsh,  the 
German,  the  French,  and  other  languages  of  today. 
Such  versions  in  themselves,  when  taken  all  together, 
are  counted  by  the  hundreds,  and  it  is  obvious  that 
even  the  merest  outHne  of  their  history  would  command 
no  small  space  in  any  volume  which  would  attempt 
their  description. 

Such  a  description  is  no  part  of  the  plan  of  this 
book.  If  the  description  were  to  be  given,  it  would 
not  add  to  the  story  of  the  growth  of  the  Bible  as  a 
whole.  It  would  merely  furnish  added  illustrations  of 
the  Bible  development  which  has  already  been  sketched 
in  its  important  aspects.  The  Bibles  of  the  mission- 
aries and  the  Bibles  of  translators  who  in  recent  years 
have  rendered  the  Scriptures  into  modern  speech  have 
been  either  the  Hebrew  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
Greek  of  the  New,  or  parts  of  these,  or,  in  the  case  of 
Catholic  activities,  the  official  Vulgate.  None  of  these 
translations  has  contributed  to  the  growth  of  the  Bible 
other  than  to  scatter  its  messages  more  widely  through- 
out the  world. 

In  outline  the  Bible  now  stands  before  us  as  a  mar- 
velous growth.  Its  beginnings,  like  the  deep-reaching 
roots  of  all  life,  are  hidden  in  the  primitive  unfolding  of 
Israehtish  experience.  As  the  springs  of  the  fountains 
from  the  eternal  hills  are  beyond  our  reach,  so  the 
springs  of  the  Scriptures  are  too  far  back  in  the  life  of 
the  past  for  us  to  touch  them  with  certainty.  This 
lack  of  knowledge,  however,  in  no  way  hinders  us  from 


MODERN  VERSIONS  20$ 

seeing  and  venerating  the  later  growth.  We  accept  it 
as  it  appears,  discern  its  enrichment  and  new  power, 
observe  it  come  to  fulness  through  the  labors  of  Jesus 
and  the  apostles,  and  then  follow  its  distribution,  its 
varied  handHng,  its  differentiation,  its  abiding  strength, 
and  its  consummate  glory  in  our  own  day.  And  we 
have  no  fear  that,  in  the  days  to  come,  it  will  lose  its 
worth.  New  knowledge  of  its  history  and  its  meaning, 
new  study  to  enter  into  its  secret  place,  will  only  enrich 
it  and  enrich  the  world. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  BIBLE  WRITINGS  AND 
VERSIONS 

The  reader  may  like  to  have  a  chronological  sum- 
mary of  the  results  of  this  study.  With  some  hesita- 
tion, because  of  the  difficulty  involved,  one  is  offered. 
Like  the  study  itself,  the  summary  is  intended  to  show 
the  growth  of  the  Bible  rather  than  to  enter  into  nicety 
of  details  concerning  the  literary  elements  which  are 
under  discussion.  For  the  purpose  thus  indicated  an 
arrangement  chiefly  by  centuries  appears  convenient  and 
suggestive.  Even  in  that  form,  however,  the  dating 
of  various  literary  events  must  be  regarded  as  merely 
approximate.  While  some  of  the  writings  of  uncertain 
date  may  belong  earlier  than  the  period  mentioned, 
error  is  more  hkely  to  have  occurred  by  placing  author- 
ship too  early. 

B.C. 

Before  1250    Primitive  songs  and  other  folklore,  but  probably 
not  written. 

1 250-1 200  Approximately  the  period  of  Moses'  activity. 
Songs,  annals,  and  the  beginning  of  written  legal 
rules  and  precedents. 

1 200-1000  Occupation  of  western  Palestine  by  Israel.  Adap- 
tation of  previous  literature  to  the  new  conditions, 
with  perhaps  some  development  of  it  by  Joshua, 
Samuel,  and  possibly  others. 
1000-800  Book  of  Jashar  and  other  poetry,  royal  annals, 
development  of  letter-writing,  probably  the  begin- 

206 


CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  BIBLE  WRITINGS       207 

B.C. 

1000-800  ning  of  written  prophecy  by  prophetic  scribes 
rather  than  by  prophets  themselves,  j&rst  traces  of 
Davidic  psahnody. 

800-700  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Micah  issued  their  mes- 
sages, which  were  later  collected  and  edited  into  their 
present  form.    Here  may  belong  Prov.  10:1 — 22 :  16. 

700-600  Nahum,  Zephaniah,  and  probably  Habakkuk  lived 
and  wrote  the  prophecies  which  were  afterward 
arranged  as  we  have  them  under  these  names. 
Before  620  the  brief  Law  as  disclosed  in  the  Tem- 
ple was  prepared.  Near  the  same  time  the  minis- 
try of  Jeremiah  began. 

600-500  Jeremiah  completed  his  work,  leaving  a  consider- 
able number  of  prophecies  as  prepared  by  his  aman- 
uensis and  later  arranged  and  edited  by  others. 
Here  was  written  the  great  work  of  Ezekiel.  In 
this  century  may  be  placed  with  some  certainty 
the  works  of  Joel  and  Obadiah,  the  Book  of  Lam- 
entations, with  Prov.  1:1 — 9:18;  22:17 — 24:22; 
25 : 1 — 29 :  27.  Haggai  delivered  his  exhortations  in 
the  year  520,  and  within  the  next  two  years  the  min- 
istry of  Zechariah  occurred,  though  a  considerable 
portion  of  the  book  which  bears  his  name  and  its 
final  arrangement  as  a  whole  belong  to  a  much 
later  period.  Probably  in  the  latter  half  of  this 
century  is  to  be  dated  most,  if  not  all,  of  Isaiah, 
chaps.  40-66.  To  this  period  may  belong  also  the 
Book  of  Job. 

500-400  To  the  beginning  of  this  century  may  be  assigned 
perhaps  the  Book  of  Jonah;  and  the  Books  of  Ruth, 
Ecclesiastes,  and  Malachi  seem  to  date  themselves 
before  the  century  closes.  Here  Ukewise  belong 
Prov.  30  and  31,  and  apparently  some  of  the  psalms. 
The  great  Uterary  event  of  this  period,  however,  is 
the  completion  of  the  Hexateuch  out  of  manifold 
sources,  perhaps  even  more  than  those  suggested  in 
the  discussion  of  the  question  in  chapter  vii. 


2o8  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

B.C. 

400-300  Within  this  period  we  may  date  the  composition 
of  the  Song  of  Songs,  Esther,  Chronicles,  Ezra- 
Nehemiah,  and  the  later  portions  of  the  Book  of 
Zechariah.  In  this  century  and  perhaps  even 
earlier  the  translation  of  portions  of  the  Hebrew 
Law  into  Greek  is  likely  to  have  occurred,  though 
the  tradition  concerning  the  translation  places  it 
about  275,  and  so  in  the  next  century.  The  tradi- 
tion, however,  is  probably  connected  with  the  com- 
pletion, or  with  some  outstanding  element,  of  the 
translation,  the  inception  having  occurred  consid- 
erably earlier.  Some  of  the  psalms  may  belong  to 
this  century. 

300-200  Unless  some  of  the  writings  assigned  to  earlier 
periods  were  really  written  or  finally  edited  here, 
this  century  was  not  fruitful  in  new  works,  Baruch 
being  the  only  book  which  appears  most  certainly 
to  have  place  at  this  time.  The  century  as  a 
whole,  however,  was  highly  important,  since  at 
about  the  close  of  it  the  great  collection  of  the 
Prophets  assumed  essentially  its  permanent  form. 
Here  belongs  likewise  much  of  the  translation 
of  the  Law  and  very  likely  some  at  least  of 
the  Prophets  into  Greek.  Probably  some  of 
the  psalms  also  may  have  originated  at  this 
time. 

200-100  At  the  beginning  of  this  century,  or  a  little  earlier, 
we  should  date  the  composition  of  Ecclesiasticus. 
Following  this  perhaps,  or  at  any  rate  about  the 
year  165,  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  written.  Some- 
where in  the  century  may  belong  I  Esdras,  Judith, 
Tobit  (Tobias),  and  the  Prayer  of  Manassas. 
The  development  of  psalmody  undoubtedly  con- 
tinued. Probably  many  of  the  Hebrew  books  of 
the  Old  Testament  not  previously  translated  were 
here  carried  over  into  Greek.  Here,  or  later,  may 
belong  the  latest  of  the  psalms. 


CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  BIBLE  WRITINGS       209 

B.C. 

1 00- 1  In  this  last  century  before  the  Christian  Era  were 
probably  written  I  Maccabees,  Susanna,  Bel  and 
the  Dragon,  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  the  Epistle 
of  Jeremiah,  the  Psalms  of  Solomon,  and  perhaps 
the  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  the  rest  of  Esther 
(that  is,  the  portions  not  in  the  Hebrew),  and 

III  Maccabees.  As  some  of  these  show  evidence 
of  having  been  written  in  Hebrew,  the  Greek 
version  of  such  may  very  likely  have  appeared  not 
long  afterward  and  so,  in  some  instances  at  any 
rate,  within  the  same  century. 

A.D. 

i-ioo    Here  may  belong  II  Maccabees,  and  probably  also 

IV  Maccabees  and  II  Esdras.  The  period  is 
supremely  significant,  however,  as  the  time  of  the 
writing  of  most,  if  not  aU,  of  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  for  the  closing,  practically  if  not 
finally,  of  the  collection  of  the  Writings  as  the  third 
division  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  about  the  year 
go  as  a  result  of  the  scribal  discussions  at  Jamnia. 

)o-20o  This  century  witnessed  the  completion  of  any  New 
Testament  writings  which  may  not  have  been  in 
final  form  before,  saw  most  of  the  gospel  narratives 
except  our  four  sifted  out,  brought  the  letters  of 
Paul  into  something  like  a  collection,  and  gathered 
other  letters  and  the  Apocalypse  in  a  similar  way 
in  those  parts  of  Christendom,  particularly  the 
West,  where  these  latter  books  were  accepted. 
Here  was  begun  also  the  formation  of  lists  of  books 
which  portions  of  the  Christian  world  were  inclined 
to  regard  as  worthy  of  supreme  attention.  The 
Muratorian  fragment  is  evidence  of  such  lists.  In 
this  period  began  the  translation  of  portions  at 
least  of  the  Christian  writings,  which  we  now  call 
the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  portions  of  the 
Old  Testament,  into  the  Latin,  Syriac,  and  Egyp- 
tian languages. 


2IO  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

A.D. 

200-300  The  creative  period  is  now  in  the  past.  It  is  a 
time  of  discussion  and  of  using  the  books  already 
in  hand.  The  records  of  such  activities  do  not 
furnish  a  large  amount  of  data  for  the  particular 
type  of  investigation  we  have  been  following.  It 
is  perhaps  not  too  much  to  say  that  Christianity 
was  beginning  to  assume  the  relatively  stereotyped 
condition  which  it  largely  maintained  during  the 
Middle  Ages. 

300-500  Aside  from  the  great  work  of  Jerome,  which  resulted 
in  the  completion  of  a  new  Latin  version  of  the 
Bible,  the  Vulgate,  and  the  missionary  enterprise 
which  produced  the  Gothic  and  the  Armenian 
versions,  these  two  centuries  continued  the  stereo- 
typing process.  Those  three  achievements,  how- 
ever, were  sufficient  to  make  the  period  notable. 
500-1300  Through  this  long  period  of  800  years  there  was 
comparatively  little  to  claim  attention  from  the 
point  of  view  of  Bible  growth.  Before  the  year  700, 
apparently,  there  was  an  Ethiopic  translation,  in 
the  following  century  one  for  the  Arabic-speaking 
people,  before  the  year  900  one  for  the  Slavonic 
Christians,  and  within  the  next  four  centuries  scat- 
tered translations,  probably  of  only  parts  of  the 
Bible,  for  outlying  regions  where  missionary  activ- 
ities had  taken  the  gospel  message,  particularly 
Britain  and  the  Germanic  districts.  These  move- 
ments largely  cover  the  field  of  action. 
1 3  00- 1 400  The  fourteenth  century  is  the  beginning  of  the 
period  of  new  hfe.  New  learning  in  other  direc- 
tions led  to  new  interest  in  the  use  of  the  Bible 
»  by  the  people.    As  an  outgrowth  there  was  the 

EngUsh  translation  of  Wichf,  and  versions  for  the 
French,  the  Spanish,  the  Portuguese,  the  Dutch, 
the  Germans,  the  Bohemians,  and  probably  others, 
all  arising  naturally  at  this  period  from  the  Latin 
Vulgate. 


CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  BIBLE  WRITINGS       211 

A.D. 

1400-1500  A  time  chiefly  of  revising  the  work  of  the  preceding 
century,  but  with  some  indications  of  new  work 
in  Hmited  fields.  This  century  is  chiefly  signifi- 
cant, however,  for  the  invention  of  printing  and 
the  consequent  increase  of  means  for  distributing 
the  Bible  to  those  who  theretofore  were  unable  to 
possess  it. 

1 500-1600  The  century  of  the  Reformation  and  of  the  making 
of  modern  Bibles.  New  versions  appeared  for  the 
Germans,  Dutch,  Danish,  Swedish,  Hungarians, 
Russians,  French,  Italians,  and  EngHsh  with  Prot- 
estant origins,  and  counterversions  for  the  Catho- 
lics of  England,  France,  Italy,  Germany,  Holland, 
and  Poland.  Of  prime  significance  were  the  New 
Testament  of  Luther  in  1522  and  that  of  Tindale 
in  1525,  both  translated  from  the  Greek,  with  Old 
Testament  versions  from  the  Hebrew  following; 
the  separation  of  the  apocrj^hal  books  from  the 
others  by  Luther  in  1534  and  by  Coverdale  in 
1535;  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  in  1546 
making  the  Vulgate  final  authority  for  all  Catho- 
lics; the  Church  of  England  article  in  1571,  depre- 
ciating the  apocryphal  books  to  a  subordinate 
status;  and  the  appearance  of  the  English  Catholic 
New  Testament  at  Rheims  in  1582. 
After  1600  The  seventeenth  century  carried  along  and  brought 
to  relative  completion  what  had  been  accomplished 
in  the  sixteenth.  At  the  beginning,  1607,  appeared 
the  great  Italian  version  which  bears  the  name  of 
Diodati.  Four  years  later  was  issued  the  classic 
English  revision  which,  as  the  Authorized  Version, 
has  been  almost  the  only  English  Protestant  Bible 
most  of  the  time  since  its  publication.  In  1648 
the  Westminster  Assembly  took  the  severe  position 
of  discarding  the  Apocrypha  altogether,  and  that 
collection  has  gradually  gone  into  disuse,  so  that 
few  of  the  ordinary  readers  of  the  Bible  have  any 


212  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

A.D. 

After  1600    knowledge  of  its  contents.    The  revision  of  most 
importance  for  English  readers  since  the  Author- 
ized Version  is  that  begun  in  England  in  1870,  the 
New  Testament  being   issued   in    1881,   the   Old 
'  in  1885,  and  the  American  edition  in  1901.    This 

last  is  in  many  respects  the  best  Bible  for  the 
EngUsh  student.  With  it  should  be  used  the 
Apocrypha,  which  was  issued  by  the  British  re- 
visers in  1895.  The  American  revisers  have  not 
pubHshed  any  edition  of  the  Apocrypha.  The  mis- 
sionary versions  and  those  issued  by  individual 
translators  since  1600  are  relatively  numberless. 
Material  showing  their  extent  and  variety  should 
be  available  in  a  good  public  or  reference  Ubrary. 


CHAPTER  XV 
WHAT  TO  READ  FURTHER 

This  volume  seems  to  be  the  first  attempt  to  sketch 
the  history  of  the  growth  of  the  Bible  from  its  begin- 
ning to  the  present.  Such  an  effort  within  a  book  of 
convenient  size  for  everyday  use  inevitably  raises  many 
questions  which  it  cannot  answer,  and  suggests  further 
reading. 

There  are  many  valuable  books  which,  in  one  way 
or  another,  bear  on  the  subject  of  study  that  this 
volume  presents.  A  mere  list  of  such  works  would  be 
confusing  rather  than  helpful.  I  offer,  therefore,  only 
a  few  titles  of  books  and  articles  the  reading  of  which 
is  essential  for  filHng  out  the  sketch  which  I  have 
drawn,  if  one  desires  to  follow  the  study  farther.  They 
are  works  which  will  be  found  in  any  good  public  library 
if  one  cannot  conveniently  own  all  of  them  for  himself. 
They  are  books  too  which  direct  to  still  wider  reading 
for  any  who  wish. 

The  Holy  Scriptures  According  to  the  Masoretic  Text;  a  New 
Translation.  Philadelphia:  Jewish  Publication  Society  of 
America,  1 91 7.     Various  prices. 

This  is  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament  rendered  into  excellent 

and  familiar  EngUsh.    No  other  volume  so  well  shows  the  Eng- 

Ush  reader  what  were  the  Scriptures  of  Jesus  and  Paul  and  what 

the  Jews  have  used  since  the  New  Testament  times. 

The  Holy  Bible   Translated  from  the  Latin   Vulgate,  Diligently 

Compared  with  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Other  Editions  in  Divers 

Languages.    A  good  edition  is  that  published  by  the  John 

Murphy  Co.,  Baltimore,  at  various  prices. 

213 


214  HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 

This  is  the  Douay  Bible  in  its  ofBcial  form.  Everyone  who 
cares  to  understand  the  Bible,  and  especially  to  know  the  Catho- 
lic Bible  and  its  variations  from  the  ordinary  Protestant  Bibles, 
should  own  a  copy  of  this  version.  It  is  essential  for  intelligent 
consideration  of  the  unfortunate  discussions  which  arise  in  Prot- 
estant and  Catholic  circles. 

The  Holy  Bible  ....  Translated  Out  oj  the  Original  Tongues 
....  Newly  edited  by  the  American  Revision  Committee, 
A.D.  1901.  This  is  the  standard  American  edition  of  the 
Revised  Version  of  the  Bible  as  pubhshed  by  Thomas  Nelson 
&  Sons,  of  New  York,  with  prices  from  less  than  one  dol- 
lar up. 

It  is  particularly  valuable  for  its  arrangement  of  the  language 
in  paragraphs,  its  presentation  of  the  poetry  of  the  Bible  in  such 
form  as  to  reveal  its  poetic  structure,  and  especially  for  the 
marginal  notes  and  comments.  The  marginal  references  are  also 
useful.  I  have  followed  this  version  regularly  in  making  quota- 
tions from  the  Protestant  Bible. 

The  Apocrypha,  Translated  Out  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  Tongues, 
being  the  version  sent  forth  a.d.  161  i,  compared  with  the 
most  ancient  authorities,  and  revised  a.d.  1894.  Oxford: 
University  Press. 

In  this  small  volume  we  have  the  standard  EngUsh  transla- 
tion of  the  Apocrypha.  It  is  important  for  access  to  the  apocry- 
phal books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  also  for  comparing  these 
books  as  thus  translated  with  the  same  writings  as  rendered  in 
the  Douay  Bible. 

Bennet,  William  H.,  and  Adeney,  Walter  F.  Biblical  Introduc- 
tion.   New  York:  Whittaker,  $2.00. 

For  a  valuable  work  in  relatively  smaU  compass  yet  covering 
the  entire  Bible  this  is  perhaps  the  best. 

Driver,  Samuel  R.  An  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old 
Testament.  loth  edition.  New  York:  Charles  Scribner's 
Sons.    $2.75. 

This  is  the  standard  work  on  the  literary  history  of  the  Old 
Testament.  It  represents  as  nearly  as  a  single  work  can  the 
consensus  of  opinion  of  reverent  scholarship  on  the  subject  of 
the  Old  Testament  hterature. 


WHAT  TO  READ  FURTHER  215 

Gregory,  Caspar  Rene.    Canon  and  Text  of  the  New  Testament. 
This  also  is  a  Scribner  publication,  belongs  to  the  same 
series  of  works  as  that  of  Driver  (The  International  Theo- 
logical Library),  and  does  for  the  New  Testament  much 
the  same  service  as  that  of  Driver  for  the  Old.     It  is  excep- 
tionally valuable  for  its  description  of  the  way  in  which 
early  Christian  writings  were  made,  copied,  cared  for,  and 
used,  and  for  its  account  of  the  papyrus  and  other  materials 
which  were  employed. 
Hastings,  James,  Editor.    A   Dictionary  of  the  Bible.     5  vols. 
New  York:  Charles  Scribner's  Sons.    $30.00. 
The  following  are  the  most  important  articles  in  this  stand- 
ard work  as  far  as  growth  of  the  Bible  is  concerned:  Apocalyptic 
Literature,  Apocrypha,  Apocryphal  Gospels,  Continental  Versions, 
Old  Testament  Canon,  New  Testament  Canon,  Septuagint,  Ver- 
sions, Versions  (English),  Vulgate.    Together  these  cover  the 
entire  field,  though  they  are  not  so  easy  for  the  Bible-study 
beginner  to  use. 


INDEX 


INDEX 


PAGE 

Abraham 60 

Abyssinia 177 

Acts,  Book  of 1 23  f . 

2:5-11 170 

16:10 123 

16:11 — 17:15 131 

17: 14— 18: 17 133 

18:1-3 .130 

i8:i8-ig. 130 

19:1 — 20:2 133 

20:1-3 133 

Acts  of  Andrew 157 

Acts  of  John IS7 

Acts  of  Paul 157 

Adeney,  Walter  F 214 

Africa: 

Christianity  in 114 

Language 143 

Agur 87 

Ahab 72 

Ahasuerus 92 

Ahijah  the  Shilonite 100 

Alexandria 107  f. 

Alexandrians,  Letter  to 155  f. 

Almeida,  John  F.  de 202 

American  history  as  apocalyptic g6  f . 

Amos 35,  207 

Andrew,  Acts  of 157 

Apocalypse 135  f. 

And  Daniel 94  f. 

Date 136 

In  New  Testament 94 

In  Armenian  version 176 

Not  in  Syriac  version 172 

1:3 95 

22:10 95 

Apocalypse  of  Peter 155  f. 

Apocalyptic  literature 95,  203 

In  Armenian  version 176 

Apocrypha: 

History 193 

In  Authorized  Version 201  f. 

In  Church  of  England 194  f. 

Meaning  of  word 193 

Modern  use 203 

Revised  Version 203,  214 

Separated  by  Coverdale 192 

Separated  by  Luther 188 

Aquila 130 

Aquila,  translator 115 

Arabic  versions 178,  210 

Aristotle 181 

Armenian  version i7S  f-,  210 

Arsinous 155 

Augustine 159  ff.,  163  ff. 

Authorized  Version 200  ff. 

Babylonia 73 

Barnabas,  Epistle  of 157 


PAGE 

Baruch,  Book  of 106, 167 

Date 208 

In  Ethiopic  version 177 

Retained  by  Coverdale 192 

Basilides 155 

Bel  and  the  Dragon 106, 167 

Date 209 

Bennett,  William  H 214 

"  Beyond  the  Jordan" 49  f. 

Bible: 

Analogies  of  growth 180 

Books  accepted  for 158  f. 

Books  in  Ethiopic  version i77  f. 

Chronology 206  ff. 

First  printed 186 

Missionary  influence 177  f. 

Modern  versions 202  f. 

In  New  Testament  times 9 

Bible-study  methods 66  f. 

Bodenstein  von  Carlstadt 188 

Bohemian  versions 185 

"Books  of  the  Chronicles" 28  f.,  71 

British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society ....  202 

British  versions 210 

Brucioli 190 

Canon  law: 

In  Ethiopic  version 177 

Carlstadt,  Andreas 188 

Cataphrygians 155 

Catholic  church 196  ff. 

Catholic  epistles 134  {. 

Not  in  Syriac  version 172 

Catholic  versions 199 

See  also  Douay  Bible 
Christians,  Early 113  f. 

Bible  of 140  f. 

Latin-speaking 142  ff. 

Old  Testament  of 115 

Chronicles 98  ff. 

Date 208 

Chronicles,  I: 

3:19-24 99 

29:29 99 

Chronicles,  II: 

9:29 100 

12:15 100 

Church  of  England 194 

Copyists 148 

Corinthians,  Letters,  I: 

5:9,  10 124, 128 

16:19 130 

Corinthians,  Letters,  II 126  ff. 

2:1-11 127 

6:11-13 125  ff. 

6:14 — 7:1 124  f. 

7:2-3 125  ff. 

10: 1 — 13: 14 127  ff. 

Corinthians'  Letter  to  Paul 176 


219 


220 


HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 


PAGE 

Council  of  Trent i66  £F. 

Coverdale,  Miles 192 

Creation  story 62!. 

Cyprian I45 

Cyril 179 

Cyrus 31 

Damasus 146  ff. 

Daniel 93 

Daniel,  Book  of 92  ff.,  112 

Date 97  f.,  208 

Jerome's  view 160 

Latin  version 160 

In  New  Testament 99 

11:40  f 95 

12:11, 12 96 

Danish  versions 189 

David 35,  70 

Debir 27 

Deborah 27  f.,  69 

Deuteronomy 43,  65 

Compilation 50,  s  2 

Sources 48  f. 

1:1 48,51,55 

i:i,S 49 

1:3 49 

3:2s 49 

4:19,  20 45 

4:41 49 

7:5 41,44 

10:17-18 44 

11:30 SO 

13:4 41 

i8:io-li 42 

27:26 45 

29:25-27 40, 44 

31:9 46 

31:10-11 19,40 

31:22 47 

31:24 46 

31:30 47 

Didache 157 

Diodati 202 

Douay  Bible 113, 195  ff. 

Convenient  edition 213  f. 

Origin  of  name 197 

See  also  Catholic  versions 

Driver,  Samuel  R 214 

Dutch  versions 185, 188  f.,  199 

Ecclesiastes 91  f.,  207 

Ecclesiasticus 106 

Date 14,  208 

Prologue II  ff.,  108 

Eck,  John 199 

Egypt,  Christianity  in 113  f. 

Egyptian  versions i73  f-,  209 

Elijah 72 

Eliot,  John 203 

Elisha 72 

Elohim 83 

English  versions 199  ff. 

Enoch,  Book  of 135,  i77 

Epistle  of  Jeremiah 106 

Date 209 

Esdras,  Book  of 168 

Esdras,  Book  1 208 


PAGE 

Esdras,  Book  II 209 

Esdras,  Book  IV. 177 

Esther,  Book  of 92,  208 

Rest  of 167,  209 

Etaples,  Le  Fevre  d' 189  f .,  199 

Ethiopic  version 177,  210 

Euergetes,  King 14 

Eusebius 156  ff. 

Eustochium 149 

Exodus: 

■  52 


3:13-14- 
6:2-6... 


61 

61 

13:21 19 

15:1-18 S8 

24:4 59 

40:38 52 

Ezekiel,  Book  of 33  f- 

Date 35,207 

Ezra 20, 39, 99 

Ezra,  Book  of: 

1:1-30 98 

Ezra-Nehemiah 98  f.,  208 

Feast  of  booths 89 

Flemish  version 185 

Florence,  Italy 190 

Folklore 206 

French  versions 184, 189  f . 

Gad  the  Seer 99 

Galations,  Letter 133, 172 

General  letters 172 

Genesis,  Date 102 

Genesis: 

1:1  ff lOI  f. 

1:11-12,  26-27 62  f. 

2 : 5-7 62  f. 

4:23-24 68 

10:1  f 67 

12:1 19 

17:17,  19 60 

18:12 60 

21:5-6 60 

27:42-45 62 

28:1-7 62 

50:26 52 

Geneva  Bible 193  f . 

German  version 185, 187  ff.,  199,  210 

Gideon 27 

God,  Titles  of 82  ff. 

Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews 157 

Gospel  hymns 80  f. 

Gospel  of  Matthias 157 

Gospel  of  Peter .157 

Gospel  of  Thomas 157 

Gospels 122  f. 

In  Latin 147  f- 

Gothic  version 175,  210 

Great  Bible 193 

Greeks  in  Egypt 103 

Gregory,  Caspar  Rene 215 

Habakkuk 207 

Haggai 35,  207 

Hastings,  James 215 


INDEX 


221 


PAGE 

Hebrew,  Old  Testament: 

Completed i3g 

Translated  into  Greek 103  ff. 

See  also  Jewish  Bible 

Hebrews,  Gospel  to 157 

Hebrews,  Letter 134, 156 

Hereford,  Nicholas 183 

Hermas iSS 

Hexateuch SS  f-.7i.  74 

Date 56,207 

Hezekiah 30,  87 

Historian 71 

History  of  the  world 71.  73 

Hosea 35,  207 

Hungarian  versions i8g 

Hus,  John 18s 

Iddo  the  Seer 100 

Ignatius  of  Antioch 152 

Indian  versions 203 

Inspiration ix 

Isaac,  Name 60  f. 

Isaiah 30, 35.  207 

Isaiah,  Book  of: 

Date,  chaps.  40-66 207 

1:1 30 

2:1 30 

6:1 30 

7:3 30 

8:1 30 

37-21 30 

38:1,  9,  21 30 

38:10-20 31 

44 : 1— 45 :2S 31 

Islam 178 

Israel: 

History  of 7S>  99 

In  Egypt 103  ff.,  no 

Sacred  books 108 

Literary  development 71 

Literature 74 

Sacred  days 89 

Scribes  in  Egypt no 

Scribes  at  Jamnia 139 

Italian  versions 184, 190, 199,  202 

Jacob  and  Laban 62 

Jahveh 84 

James  I,  King 200 

James,  Letter  of I3S 

Jamnia i39 

Jashar,  Book  of 23  ff.,  26  f.,  56 

Date 70,  206 

Jehoshophat,  Scribe 26 

Jehovah,  Name  of 61,  82  ff. 

Jeremiah 32  f.,  43 

Date 35.207 

Jeremiah,  Book  of: 

In  Greek 33,  m  f- 

1:1,  4,  II,  13 32 

1:2 43 

11:3-4 44 

17:1,  2 44 

18:1,  5 32 

19:3.  4 44 

19:13 45 


PAGE 

Jeremiah,  Book  of: 

22:3 44 

25:13 32 

36:1-32 32 

51:64 33 

52:1-27 33 

Jeroboam 100 

Jerome 125, 146  ff.,  195 

Jerubbaal, 27 

Jerusalem,  Destruction  of 89, 139 

Jesus ii8ff. 

Lives  of 1 20  f . 

Jewish  Bible 4  ff.,  213 

Order  of  books 8,  loi 

Title 6 

Jewish  scribes.    See  Israel;  Scribes 
Jews.     See  Israel 

Joab 70 

Job,  Book  of 88  f.,  150 

Joel 207 

John,  Acts  of 157 

John,  Gospel  of 123 

8:6-8 118 

19: 19,  20 142 

John,  Letters  of 135 

Jonah 34,207 

Josephus 104 

Joshua 53.68 

Joshua,  Book  of 25  f. 

1:1 52  f. 

8:32 68 

10:12-13 23,  2S 

24:26 68 

24:29-30 53 

Josiah 38  f .,  42 

Jubilees,  Book  of 177 

Jude,  Letter  of 13s 

Judges,  Book  of 27 

i:i S3 

I :  I — 2 :  23 5i 

1:11-12 69 

4:1—5:31 27  f- 

7:1 27 

Judith 106,  160,  208 

Justin  Martyr 152 

Karolyi,  Kaspar 189 

King  James  Version 200  ff. 

Kings,  Books  of 28  f.,  72 

Kings,  Book  I: 

11:41 28,71 

14:29 28 

15:7,  23 28 

15:31 28 

16:5 28 

Kings,  Book  II: 

2:3-7 72 

22:3  f 38 

22: 16,  17 44 

22: 17 40 

23:1-2 38,40 

23:3 41 

23:14 41.44 

23:24 42 

23:28 28 

24:18—25:21 33 

Kiriath-sepher 27, 69 


222 


HOW  THE  BIBLE  GREW 


PAGE 

Lamentations 91,  207 

Laodiceans,  Letter  to 155  f-,  184 

Latin  versions 142  ff . 

Approved  by  Augustine 166 

Date 209 

Law: 

Found  in  Temple 43,  S4 

In  New  Testament 8,14 

Reading  of 20, 39 

Sources  of 46  fi. 

Time  of  Josiah 42  f.,  45, 50, 54 

Law  and  Prophets 8  f.,  12  f. 

Lemuel,  King 87 

Leviticus: 

1:1 52 

23:42 18 

27:34 52 

Louvain 199 

Luke,  Gospel  of 121 

Date 121  f. 

1:1-4 119  f. 

4:16-19 118 

24:44 15 

Luther,  Martin 187  ff. 

Maccabees,  Books  of 106,  209 

Maccabees,  Book  IV 116 

Malachi 35,  207 

Manassas,  Prayer  of 168 

Marcion 155 

Marriage 91 

Matthew,  Gospel  of,  7: 12 3 

Matthews  Bible 193 

Megilloth 89  ff. 

Men  of  Hezekiah 87 

Methodius 179 

Metiades 155 

Micah 35,  207 

Middle  Ages 182 

Minor  Prophets.    See  Twelve;   Book 

Missionary  Bibles 204 

Modern  versions 210  ff. 

Moody  and  Sankey  hymns 80  f. 

Moses: 

Annalist 58 

Author 46,47,59,64 

Date  and  writings 206 

Death 52 

Poet 47  f.,  58 

Song  of 58 

Muratori 153 

Muratorian  fragment 153  ff-,  209 

Nahum 207 

Nathan  the  prophet 99  f. 

Nehemiah,  Book  of 17,  20 

7:73—8:1  ff 17 

8:13,  14 18 

8:14,  16 21 

8:18 19 

9:7 19 

9:12 ig 

13:23-31 91 

New  Testament 1 18  f . 

Augustine's  view 163  ff. 

Date 165,  209 

In  time  of  Jerome 159 


PAGE 

New  Testament: 

Jerome's  view 161  f . 

Order  of  books 136, 154  f. 

Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers 147 

Northern  Africa.    See  Africa;    Egypt 

Numbers,  Book  of: 

Compilation 59 

Numbers,  Book  of: 

1:1 52 

21:14 57 

21:17,  18 57 

21:27-30 57 

29:35 19 

33:2 58 

36:13 55 

36:1s 51 

Obadiah 207 

Old  Latin  versions.    See  Latin  versions 

Old  Testament loi 

In  Egypt 14 

Greek  versions 104  ff.,  109, 115  f. 

Jerome's  view 160  f. 

In  New  Testament 141 

Relation  to  early  Christianity 113 

Relation  to  New  Testament 113 

In  time  of  Ezra 20  f. 

In  time  of  Jesus 116  f. 

Olivetan 190 

Palestine 69 

Passover 89 

Paul,  Acts  of IS7 

Paul,  Martyrdom 134 

Paula 149 

Paul's  letters: 

Composition 124  ff. 

Date  of  collection 2op 

Date 133  f. 

Pentateuch 55,  59 

Pentecost 89 

Peter,  Apocalypse 155  f. 

Peter,  Letters 13S 

Petrarch 181 

Philippians,  Letter 131  f. 

Pius  1 155 

Pius  IV 199 

Poetry,  Early 48 

Poetry  and  law 58 

Polish  versions 189, 199  f. 

Portuguese  versions 184  f.,  202 

Prayer  of  Manassas 168,  208 

Presbyterians 201 

Priestly  scholars 73 

Printing,  Invention  of 186 

Priscilla  (Prisca) 130 

Prophetic  secretaries 72 

Prophets: 

Accepted  as  Scripture 75 

Date 35  {-,  208 

In  Egypt 110 

In  New  Testament 9 

Sources 23  ff.,  56 

Protestant  and  Catholic  Bibles 197  f . 

Proverbs,  Book  of 85  ff. 

Date 207 

Titles  in 85  ff. 


INDEX 


223 


PAGE 

Proverbs,  Book  of: 

1:1 8s 

10:1 86 

22:17 86 

25:1 87 

Proverbs,  Those  that  speak  in 57 

Psalms,  Book  of 79  ff- 

Date 102,  207  ff. 

Five  divisions 78 

Latest  portions 208 

In  Latin i47  f • 

In  New  Testament 77 

14:1-7 78  f. 

40:13-17 -8° 

53:1-6 78  f. 

57:7-11 80 

60:5-12 80 

70:1-5 80 

72:20 81  f. 

108 : 1-13 80 

Psalms  of  Solomon 106,  209 

Ptolemy  IX 14 

Ptolemy  Philadelphus 104 

Purim 89 

Puritans 201 

Reformation,  Effect  on  the  Bible 

168, 181  ff. 

Rehoboam 100 

Renaissance 184 

Revelation,  Book  of.    See  Apocalypse 

Revised  Version 202  f . 

American  edition 214 

Translators 84 

Rolls 89  ff. 

Roman  Catholic  Bible.    See  Douay 
Bible;   Vulgate 

Romans,  Letter 129  ff. 

15:33 130 

16:1  f 130  f. 

Rome,  Language  of 143, 146 

Rufus 130 

Russian  versions 189 

Ruth,  Book  of 90  f.,  207 

Samuel 70 

Samuel,  Book  I: 

10:25 70 

Samuel,  Book  II: 

1 :  17-27 24 

8:16 26 

11:14 70 

20:24-25 26 

Samuel  the  Seer 99 

Sarah 60 

Scribes,  Early 26 

In  Egypt no 

Semitic  influence 171  f. 

Septuagint 104  ff.,  in 

Date 208 

Order  of  books 105  f . 

See  also  Old  Testament 

Shepherd  of  Herraas 155  f.,  157 

Sheva,  Scribe 26 

Sirach,  Book  of.    See  Ecclesiasticus 

Siricius 148 

Slavonic  version 179,  210 


PAGE 

Solomon .7°,  91 

See  also  Psalms  of  Solomon;    Wisdom 
of  Solomon 
Song  of  Solomon.     See  Song  of  Songs 

Song  of  Songs 89  f.,  208 

Song  of  the  Three  Children 209 

Spanish  versions 184  f. 

Susanna 106, 167,  209 

Swedish  versions 189 

Swete,  Henry  Barclay 105 

Symmachus 116 

Syriac  version 170  ff.,  209 

Tatian 171 

Tavenner  Bible i93 

Teachings  of  the  Apostles i57 

Temple  Law 43,54,207 

TertuUian I4S 

Theodotion nS 

Thirty-nine  Articles i94 

Timothy,  Letters  of 132 

Timothy,  Letters  of,  II: 

4:19 131 

Tindale,  William 191 

Titus,  Letter 132 

Tobit 106, 160,  208 

Torah 6 

Trent,  Council  of 166  ff. 

Twelve,  Books 34- 1°6 

Tyndale,  William 191 

Ulfilas 175 

Valentinus i55 

Vatican  MSS 107 

Venice,  Italy 190 

Vulgate 146  ff. 

Authority  for  Catholics 196 

Date 210 

New  text  of 190 

Official  contents 166  ff . 

See  also  Douay  Bible 

Wars  of  Jehovah 57 

Westcott,  Brooke  Foss 153 

Westminster  Confession 201 

Wiclif,  John 183  f.,  210 

Wisdom  of  Solomon 106, 116, 155  f. 

Date 209 

"Wise" 86 

Writings 77  ff-,  106 

Collected 139 

Date 209 

In  Ecclesiasticus 13 

List  of 7 

In  New  Testament  times 77 

Wycliffe,  John 183  f .,  210 

Xerxes 92 

Yahu 84 

Zechariah,  Book  of 34  f- 

Date 35,  207  f. 

Zephaniah 207 

Zerubbabel 99 


Date  Due 

1 

noT  ' 

,i  • 

!'>>  ■ 

1^19  '# 

.  ".--( 

y.V'- 

.mm "»"** 

■Mt^ 

f) 

